Dog owners Wendy Love and Jay Hamm were delivering firewood for their business on the evening of June 29, 2019, when they pulled into the parking lot of a commercial building, where a police officer soon arrived. It was Saturday and there were no other people around, so Love and Hamm pulled their dogs out of the truck to stretch.
The Incident
After parking several feet away from Love and Hamm, the video showed Bubba, a 16-year-old dog, running toward the officer. The officer immediately pointed his gun at Bubba, and Love and Hamm asked Bubba to turn back. Although Bubba turned away, Herkimer, a 14-month-old puppy who had been resting in the couple’s van, jumped out at the commotion. Herkimer ran toward Grashorn and the officer shot him in the head and torso.
The lawsuit against the police officer
Love and Hamm sued Grashorn, alleging an unlawful seizure under the Fourth Amendment. In turn, Grashorn asserted qualified immunity and asked the judge to resolve the case in his favor without trial.
The judge’s ruling
The Judge, Hon. Raymond Moore, concluded that a jury could reach different conclusions about the reasonableness of Grashorn’s conduct and refused to end the case outright.
“Although a reasonable jury could decide that Herkimer [el perro] posed a danger to the defendant [oficial de policía], it could also decide that he did not pose an immediate danger. Because there is sufficient evidence of the latter, this factor weighs in favor of plaintiffs [Los dueños del perro].” Order, Nov. 15, 2023. Civil Action 21-cv-02502-RM-KLM.
Appeal and federal judge’s comments
Grashorn appealed to the Tenth Circuit, arguing that Moore’s analysis was legally flawed.
At the recent hearing, one of the judges noted the following:
“Dogs that are clearly someone’s pets, often running loose, will pounce on people. What doesn’t seem to happen, more commonly, is that those dogs are shot and killed” from the police officer.
Federal appellate judge, Richard Federico. Love v. Grasshorn, 23-1397 (rehearing, Jan. 22, 2025), ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/oralarguments/23-1397.mp3
The judge alluded to a 2016 Tenth Circuit decision, Mayfield v. Bethards 826 F.3d 1252 (10th Cir. 2016), which held that a police officer can commit a constitutional violation by killing people’s domestic dogs.
What’s next?
Therefore, it seems almost certain that the case will be remanded to the trial court for a jury trial.
For more cases like this, visit this page.
