SAN FRANCISCO (CN) - A civil case involving accusations of excessive force in the tasing of a man who fell into a coma will proceed against an officer and his employer.

U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley this week handed a mixed ruling to East Bay Regional Park District Officer Jonathan Knea and the parks district, dismissing parts of the lawsuit stemming from a 2024 Taser incident. Portions of a Fourth Amendment claim, a 14th Amendment claim and false imprisonment claims were thrown out.

But other claims brought by Deontae Charles Faison - who says Knea shocked him with a Taser while he was in San Leandro Bay, leaving him in a coma - survived. Corley ruled that while Knea's first two Taser discharges did not violate the Fourth Amendment, claims tied to the third, fourth and fifth discharges may go to trial. Monell and Bane Act claims also remain, along with negligence, battery and punitive damages claims against Knea.

Punitive damages against the parks district were dismissed.

"Because reasonable jurors could find Officer Knea's tasing injured plaintiff, the court declines to grant defendants' summary judgment on all plaintiff's claims," Corley said in her Thursday ruling.

Knea is accused of repeatedly tasing Faison as he ran from a traffic stop for expired tags. Knea and another officer gave chase, and Knea fired his Taser five times. Faison eventually reached the water and called for help. When officers reached him, he had no pulse and was not breathing, the judge said.

Citing medical testimony, Corley said Faison has little to no purposeful neurological function and an estimated life expectancy of about seven more years.

In analyzing the claims, the judge drew a distinction between the first two Taser discharges - when Faison was actively fleeing - and the final three, which occurred when he was at or near the water.

Qualified immunity exists for the first two, the judge ruled.

"However, because a reasonable trier of fact could find Officer Knea's third, fourth, and fifth Taser deployments constituted unreasonable deadly force, factual disputes prevent the court from concluding qualified immunity applies," Corley added.

Concerning the 14th Amendment claim, the judge granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment.

Faison has argued that Knea chased him into the water, making drowning a possibility. Also, jurors could decide that Knea knew the risk of tasing Faison while in the water and had no regard for the possible consequences.

However, the defendants received qualified immunity on claims they impeded Faison's access to medical care.

"... Plaintiff cites no evidence from which reasonable jurors could conclude ... officers or medical personnel would have performed a more rapid rescue or otherwise responded differently if Officer Knea had reported to dispatch his tasing of plaintiff," Corley said.

Corley also dismissed Faison's false imprisonment claim, with the defendants finding no basis for jurors to conclude Knea intentionally confined him in the water or prevented him from leaving. Faison did not contest that argument, the judge noted.

However, Corley allowed several claims to proceed. She said a jury could find that tasing Faison in the water reflected a municipal policy or training failure amounting to deliberate indifference, supporting Monell claims tied to possible Fourth and 14th Amendment violations. Repeated Taser use in the water, she wrote, could show inadequate training.

Negligence and battery claims also survive. Jurors could conclude Knea exposed Faison to danger and used unreasonable force by firing the Taser five times, Corley ruled.

Looking at the Bane Act claim, the judge noted that it requires someone to show an officer intended to violate someone's rights.

"Defendants do not explain how based on this record a jury could not find Officer Knea acted without the specific intent to violate plaintiff's Fourth or 14th amendment rights," Corley said. "And, ultimately, questions about Officer Knea's intent are more appropriately reserved for the jury."

Corley said punitive damages cannot be assessed against the parks district but may be sought against Knea personally if Faison can show the officer acted with more than mere negligence.

Attorneys for both sides couldn't immediately be reached for comment.

Source: Courthouse News Service