CA7: No QI for 2015 detention of 16 year old without justification

Officers are denied qualified immunity winning at trial for his false detention four days before Christmas nearly a decade ago. The law was clearly established plaintiff couldn’t be detained like this for no apparent reason. Taylor v. Schwarzhuber, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6198 (7th Cir. Mar. 17, 2025)*:

On December 21, 2015, at just past seven in the evening, sixteen-year-old Isaiah Taylor ran through his Milwaukee neighborhood to deliver a holiday turkey to neighbors. He was stopped by police officers Justin Schwarzhuber and Jasen Rydzewski, who frisked him, searched his bag, and detained him in their police car while they checked if he had any outstanding warrants—and if any “fresh robberies” were reported in the area. Taylor later sued the officers under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for conducting an unreasonable search and seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment and for racial profiling in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The magistrate judge presiding over the case in district court granted qualified immunity and summary judgment to Schwarzhuber and Rydzewski on Taylor’s Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim, and on Taylor’s Fourth Amendment claim so far as the initial stop and the frisk were concerned. But the court denied qualified immunity to the officers on another Fourth Amendment issue, sending that issue to trial: the lawfulness of the officers’ continued detention of Taylor beyond the initial stop and frisk. The jury found the officers not liable, and the court later denied Taylor’s motion for post-trial relief pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59.

Taylor now appeals. He argues that the court improperly awarded qualified immunity and summary judgment to the officers, and improperly declined to grant him judgment as a matter of law. We affirm the grant of summary judgment to the officers on Taylor’s Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim. But, on this record, we conclude that the officers are not entitled to qualified immunity or summary judgment on Taylor’s Fourth Amendment unreasonable search and seizure claims. As to those claims, we vacate the summary judgment on the stop and frisk issue, vacate the jury verdict on the continued detention issue as a result, and remand for a new trial.

This entry was posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Qualified immunity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.