The district court discussed, and Plaintiff cites, a number of cases involving police tackles or takedowns. Most of these cases are of limited usefulness, however, because the facts are dissimilar to this case. Several cases found excessive force based on abusive conduct subsequent to the takedown. In
Gouskos v. Griffith, 122 Fed.Appx. 965, 967–68 (10th Cir.2005) (unpublished), an officer threw to the ground a man who was picking up his daughter from a rowdy party.
The officer allegedly choked the man almost to unconsciousness and continued to step on his back so he could not breathe after he was handcuffed and totally subdued.
Id. at 975. The district court granted the officer qualified immunity, but we reversed, holding the facts showed a violation of a clearly established right.
Id. at 977. In support of our holding, however, we cited cases dealing with “post-arrest kicking, beating and choking.”
Id. Gouskos is not particularly helpful here, because it focused on the subsequent beating, rather than the initial takedown. This same problem arises with other cases Plaintiff cites.
See Dixon v. Richer, 922 F.2d 1456 (10th Cir.1991) (police officers stopped a man suspected of having information about a fight and beat him with a flashlight, despite his compliance);
Butler v. City of Norman, 992 F.2d 1053, 1055 (10th Cir.1993) (three officers tackled plaintiff and beat him with a flashlight for about a minute).
In short, we have found no cases addressing the type of force used here—a forceful takedown that by itself caused serious injury.