Where plaintiff showed he didn’t know he was being pursued by police while on his motorcycle, the officer’s act of opening his car door to knock him off his bike was a question for the jury, and the officer gets no qualified immunity. In all the cases relied on by the state, the plaintiff knew he was being pursued. Sluman v. State ex rel. Wash. State Patrol, 2018 Wash. App. LEXIS 1179 (May 21, 2018):
¶133 When we view the facts in a light favorable to Thomas Sluman, Sluman rode his motorcycle without any knowledge that police pursued him or desired him to stop. Based on these facts, Sluman need not have reasonably foreseen that someone would park his car in his lane of traffic, let alone open his car door at the last moment in order to strike Sluman. Whether an intervening act constitutes a superseding cause is generally a question of fact for the jury. Hertog ex rel. S.A.H. v. City of Seattle, 138 Wn.2d 265, 275, 282-83, 979 P.2d 400 (1999); Indoor Billboard/Washington, Inc. v. Integra Telecom of Washington, Inc., 162 Wn.2d 59, 83, 170 P.3d 10 (2007).