Did a Police Officer Use More Force Than the Situation Required?
We Can Help
If you were injured by police, you may have a legal claim under federal civil rights law. Excessive force by law enforcement is a constitutional violation — and the attorneys at Nisar Law Group are here to help you understand your rights and fight for the compensation you deserve.
Contact Nisar Law Group, P.C. at (212) 600-9534 to learn how we can be of service.
What Is Excessive Force?
Excessive force happens when a law enforcement officer uses more physical force than is reasonably necessary to accomplish a legitimate law enforcement objective. The keyword is reasonable — not perfect, not minimal, but objectively reasonable given the specific circumstances the officer faced in the moment.
Under federal law, all excessive force claims brought against police during an arrest or investigative stop are evaluated under the Fourth Amendment’s objective reasonableness standard, a framework established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Graham v. Connor (1989). Courts look at three core factors when analyzing whether force was excessive:
- The severity of the crime being investigated
- Whether the suspect posed an immediate threat to officers or others
- Whether the suspect was actively resisting or attempting to flee
The officer’s subjective intent — what they believed or felt — is legally irrelevant. What matters is how a reasonable officer would have responded to the same facts and circumstances. This distinction is important because it means officers cannot justify excessive force by claiming they “felt” threatened without objective facts to back that up.
Understanding how courts apply this objective reasonableness standard is part of how we evaluate every civil rights and constitutional litigation claim we take on.
What Counts as Excessive Force?
Not every use of force by police is excessive. But many situations go far beyond what the law allows. Common examples include:
- Striking, kicking, or punching someone who is already restrained or not resisting
- Using a chokehold — banned by law in New York and restricted in multiple other states
- Deploying a taser, pepper spray, or other weapons against someone who poses no threat
- Shooting someone who is unarmed, fleeing, or not posing a significant threat of death or serious injury
- Slamming someone to the ground without justification
- Using force against someone during a mental health crisis who presents no danger
- Allowing a police dog to bite someone who has already surrendered
Excessive force during a stop or arrest can happen to anyone. It disproportionately impacts communities of color — and it often occurs alongside related violations like wrongful arrest or police misconduct that compound the harm.
The legal basis for excessive force claims changes depending on the person’s status at the time of the encounter. Free citizens being stopped or arrested are protected by the Fourth Amendment. Pretrial detainees are protected by the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause’s objective reasonableness standard under Kingsley v. Hendrickson (2015). Convicted prisoners fall under the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment, which requires showing the force was used “maliciously and sadistically.”
What Are Your Rights Under Federal and State Law?
You are protected by multiple overlapping layers of law — federal, state, and in some jurisdictions, local. Understanding all of them is critical to building the strongest possible case.
How the Federal Civil Rights Law (Section 1983) Protects You
The primary vehicle for most excessive force claims is 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the federal civil rights statute that allows individuals to sue government actors for constitutional violations. To bring a successful § 1983 excessive force claim, you generally need to show:
- The officer was acting under color of state law (i.e., acting in their capacity as a police officer)
- Their actions deprived you of a right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution
- You suffered actual harm as a result (including psychological or reputational harm)
Both the individual officer and, in some cases, the municipality can be held responsible. Under the landmark Monell v. Department of Social Services decision, municipalities can face liability for government misconduct when a constitutional violation results from an official policy, a widespread practice, or a failure to train officers. To illustrate the scale of what institutional liability looks like in practice: the City of New York has paid nearly $800 million in NYPD misconduct settlements since 2019 — a figure that reflects both the depth of the problem and the viability of Monell claims when the evidence supports them.
Qualified Immunity — and Where It Has Been Reformed
Qualified immunity has been one of the biggest barriers to justice in excessive force cases nationwide — it shields officers from personal liability unless their conduct violated “clearly established” law. But that barrier has been reduced in several jurisdictions. New York City’s Local Law 48 (2021) made NYC the first major city in the United States to limit qualified immunity for local civil rights claims — NYPD officers cannot use it as a defense for unreasonable search and seizure or excessive force. State laws in Colorado, New Mexico, and Massachusetts have enacted similar reforms. Understanding what qualified immunity protections apply — or don’t apply — in your jurisdiction is an important part of evaluating your claim.
State Use-of-Force Laws: New York as an Example
States vary significantly in how far they go beyond the federal baseline on use-of-force restrictions. New York enacted one of the toughest statutes in the country: the Eric Garner Anti-Chokehold Act, which makes it a Class C felony for a police officer to use a chokehold causing serious physical injury or death, carrying a sentence of up to 15 years. Even without serious injury, chokeholds constitute a Class A misdemeanor under New York law. This statute has direct implications for civil claims brought in New York — its existence establishes that the conduct is prohibited under state law, strengthening the case. If your claim arises in another state, the applicable state statutes will differ, and an attorney can identify what additional protections exist in your jurisdiction.
The Numbers Don't Lie: What the Data Shows
Institutional data is one of the most powerful tools in an excessive force case — and jurisdictions that make it publicly available provide critical evidence for pattern-and-practice claims. New York City publishes some of the most detailed excessive force data in the country, and the numbers illustrate what systemic failure looks like at scale.
According to a NYC Comptroller report, CCRB excessive force complaints increased 49% between 2022 and 2023, reaching the highest level since 2013. In 2024, individual allegations of excessive or unnecessary force submitted to the CCRB rose again to 7,080 complaints.
In FY 2024, NYPD had more tort claims filed than any other City agency — 9,249 total filings, up nearly 32% from the prior year. These trends are not evenly distributed. Sixteen precincts showed increases of more than 50% in annual CCRB force complaints, and the four precincts with the most complaints are in communities that are overwhelmingly Black or Hispanic/Latino.
This kind of data — complaint concentration by unit, demographic breakdowns, settlement histories by precinct — is exactly what pattern-and-practice Monell claims are built from. It exists in varying forms across jurisdictions. An attorney experienced in civil rights litigation knows where to find it and how to use it.
What Evidence Matters in an Excessive Force Case?
Strong excessive force cases are built on concrete evidence. The more you can document and preserve early, the stronger your case will be. Key evidence includes:
Body Camera Footage
Body-worn cameras are now standard issue across most police agencies. This footage can be decisive — studies show that cases relying on video evidence are substantiated at dramatically higher rates than those without it. If you were involved in an incident with police, request preservation of body camera footage immediately. This material can be lost or overwritten if not specifically preserved.
Civilian Complaint Records and Disciplinary History
Where officer disciplinary records are accessible — as they are in New York following the 2020 repeal of Civil Rights Law § 50-a — prior complaints against the same officer are directly relevant to your case. They can demonstrate a pattern of misconduct and support Monell claims against the department. In New York City specifically, you can file a complaint with the NYC Civilian Complaint Review Board, which investigates force, abuse of authority, discourtesy, and offensive language by NYPD officers. Other jurisdictions have their own civilian oversight mechanisms — an attorney can advise on what’s available where your incident occurred.
Medical Records and Photographs
Document every injury — photographs, emergency room records, follow-up treatment, and any mental health impact from the encounter. Pain and suffering, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life are all recoverable in a successful civil rights claim, alongside economic losses.
Witness Statements and Civilian Video
Bystander footage, including surveillance video, and eyewitness testimony can corroborate your account and fill gaps in official records. Civilian video captured on smartphones has been instrumental in many major police misconduct cases.
Prior Lawsuits and Settlement Data
Pattern evidence — prior lawsuits against the same officer or unit — is powerful in both individual claims and broader Monell challenges. The NYC Comptroller’s Claims Dashboard makes settlement and claim data publicly available by precinct and officer for NYC cases. Many other jurisdictions publish similar records through their comptrollers, city attorneys, or public records offices.
What Can You Recover in an Excessive Force Case?
Victims of excessive force can pursue several categories of damages, depending on the facts of their case:
Compensatory Damages cover your actual losses — medical expenses, lost wages, diminished earning capacity, physical pain and suffering, and emotional distress. In serious cases involving serious injury, these figures can be substantial.
Nominal Damages are often awarded against individual officers when the excessive force claim is successful, but there are no specific economic expenses to be compensated (often $1, but it triggers the plaintiff’s right to seek attorneys’ fees as the prevailing party).
Punitive Damages can be assessed against individual officers (though not against the municipality itself) when the conduct was especially egregious or reckless. They are meant to punish and deter, not just compensate.
Attorneys’ Fees are recoverable from defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 if you prevail on a federal civil rights claim. This provision was designed to make civil rights litigation accessible regardless of a victim’s financial resources.
Injunctive Relief in some cases — particularly those involving systemic patterns — can require policy changes, additional training, or ongoing monitoring of a police unit. Even if damages are not awarded, injunctive relief triggers the plaintiff’s ability to seek attorneys’ fees as the prevailing party.
How Long Do You Have to File?
Timing is critical in excessive force cases. Missing a deadline can permanently bar your claim, no matter how strong the facts are.
For federal § 1983 claims, the statute of limitations is borrowed from the state’s personal injury law and varies by state — typically three years in most jurisdictions, but you should confirm the deadline in your state immediately. Federal § 1983 claims do not require a Notice of Claim — one reason many attorneys prefer to file in federal court.
For state-law claims against government entities, additional requirements often apply. Many jurisdictions require a Notice of Claim to be filed before any lawsuit can proceed — sometimes within as few as 90 days of the incident. In New York, for example, a Notice of Claim must be filed within 90 days of the incident under General Municipal Law § 50-e, and the lawsuit must be commenced within 1 year and 90 days under General Municipal Law § 50-i. The requirements in your jurisdiction may differ, but the stakes are the same: missing these deadlines permanently bars those state-law claims.
If you think your rights may have been violated, don’t wait. Contact Nisar Law Group as soon as possible so we can preserve evidence, meet all deadlines, and build the strongest possible case on your behalf.
Why Nisar Law Group?
Nisar Law Group is a civil rights and employment litigation firm that exclusively represents individuals — never corporations, never government entities. When you come to us, we are always on your side.
Our attorneys understand the specific challenges of federal civil rights litigation: the procedural complexity, the power imbalance between individuals and government, and the tactics used to minimize or defeat legitimate claims. We know the law, we know the courts, and we know how to fight effectively for our clients.
We handle the full spectrum of civil rights violations — police misconduct, wrongful arrest, First Amendment retaliation, prisoner rights, religious discrimination by government entities, and government misconduct. And we are committed to making sure that the people who experience these violations have a voice in the legal system.
Contact us at (212) 600-9534 to schedule a confidential consultation.
Why We're the Right Choice
- Seasoned Litigators Who Have Handled Numerous Jury & Bench Trials
- Providing Representation with Clarity, Honesty & Integrity
- Building Long-Term Affiliations & Relationships
- Offering Consultations for All Case Types We Handle
Frequently Asked Questions About Excessive Force
Excessive force is any amount of physical force by a law enforcement officer that exceeds what a reasonable officer would use under the same facts and circumstances. The legal test, established by the Supreme Court in Graham v. Connor, is objective — it looks at what a trained officer would have done, not what this particular officer was thinking or feeling. Striking a non-resisting person, using a chokehold, deploying weapons against someone who poses no real threat, and shooting an unarmed person are all examples that courts have found to qualify.
Yes. Excessive force during an arrest or investigative stop violates the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable seizures. For pretrial detainees, the Fourteenth Amendment applies. For convicted prisoners, the Eighth Amendment governs. In each case, there is a constitutional violation when officers use force that goes beyond what the legal standard permits for that context.
In most jurisdictions, the government entity — not the individual officer — typically pays judgments and settlements through indemnification. This means that even when officers face no personal financial consequence, the municipality can still be held liable. In New York City specifically, the City paid a record $1.94 billion in total settlements in FY 2024, with NYPD excessive force claims representing a significant portion of that amount. The structure varies by state and jurisdiction, but the principle of government indemnification is common across the country.
Yes. Emotional distress is a recognized category of compensatory damages in civil rights claims. If you experienced anxiety, depression, PTSD, sleep disturbances, or other psychological harm as a result of an excessive force incident, those injuries can be included in your claim. You do not need to have suffered a physical injury to recover for emotional distress, though the presence of physical injuries could strengthen the case.
For federal civil rights claims under § 1983, the statute of limitations is typically three years from the date of the incident in most states, but it varies — confirm your state’s deadline immediately. State-law claims against government entities often carry shorter timeframes and may require a Notice of Claim before suit can be filed. In New York, for example, the Notice of Claim must be filed within 90 days of the incident, and the lawsuit must begin within one year and ninety days. Missing these deadlines can permanently bar your state-law claims. Federal § 1983 claims require no Notice of Claim, which is why speaking with an attorney quickly is critical.
Signs that force may have been excessive include: injuries that go beyond what the situation could justify; use of force against someone who was already restrained, compliant, or surrendering; deployment of weapons in situations where verbal commands would have sufficed; force used during a mental health crisis; and significant disparity between what the person was alleged to have done and how severely officers responded. Document your injuries with photos, seek medical attention, and speak with an attorney promptly.
A lack of resistance significantly limits the force police can legally use. The Supreme Court’s Graham test requires courts to assess, among other things, whether someone was actively resisting or attempting to flee. If you were not resisting, those facts work in your favor. Officers who continue to apply force after a person has stopped resisting — or who use force against someone who never resisted — are on legally precarious ground. Whether the specific use of force was excessive still depends on the full circumstances, which is why speaking with an attorney is important.
