Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Mary Dawes, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Decedent Genevive A. Dawes, et al. v. City of Dallas, Texas, et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, No. 22-10876 · judgment May 20, 2024


Certiorari denied · May 19, 2025
Pre-decision estimate: 2% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Question presented

Petitioners, the plaintiffs in the underlying case, brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Officers Hess and Kimpel after the officers shot and killed Genevive Dawes during an incident where officers were responding to a report of a suspicious vehicle in an apartment complex parking lot. The summary judgment record includes numerous videos from officer body cameras showing that no one was in danger at the time Officers Hess and Kimpel decided to shoot. However, the district court and the Fifth Circuit considered the officers’ subjective statements that they believed other officers were in danger from Dawes’s vehicle, even though such belief was belied by the actual, objective video evidence. In considering that belief, the Fifth Circuit determined that the clearly established law did not prohibit the use of deadly force even when an officer knows that there is no danger. The Question Presented Is: In a qualified immunity determination on summary judgment, did the officer's testimony that he subjectively believed there was a danger justifying the use of deadly force negate the fact issue raised by the objective video evidence showing that there was no danger?

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Shelby Jean White
Durham, Pittard & Spalding, LLP

For respondent
Mark E. Goldstucker
Law Office of Mark E. Goldstucker

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 7 conferences

Proceedings

  1. May 19 2025
    Petition DENIED.
  2. May 12 2025
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/15/2025.
  3. Apr 28 2025
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/2/2025.
  4. Apr 28 2025
    Rescheduled.
  5. Apr 21 2025
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/25/2025.
  6. Apr 21 2025
    Rescheduled.
  7. Apr 15 2025
    Rescheduled.
  8. Apr 14 2025
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/17/2025.
  9. Apr 01 2025
    Rescheduled.
  10. Mar 31 2025
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/4/2025.
  11. Mar 26 2025
    Rescheduled.
  12. Mar 12 2025
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/28/2025.
  13. Mar 11 2025
    Waiver of petitioners of right to file a reply not accepted for filing. (March 12, 2025)
  14. Feb 24 2025
    Brief of respondents Christopher Hess, et al. in opposition filed.
  15. Feb 24 2025
    Letter dated February 24, 2025 from counsel for respondent City of Dallas, Texas filed.
  16. Jan 23 2025
    Response Requested. (Due February 24, 2025)
  17. Jan 08 2025
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/24/2025.
  18. Dec 23 2024
    Waiver of right of respondent Christopher Hess to respond filed.
  19. Dec 18 2024
    Waiver of right of respondent City of Dallas to respond filed.
  20. Nov 18 2024
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 23, 2024)