Excessive Force Lawyers in New York

Police can use force, but only so much. The Constitution draws the line at what is reasonable, and force that crosses it is an excessive force violation you can sue over. These cases are a core part of what our firm does, and we have handled them across New York for more than 30 years.

The two ideas you need to understand are objective reasonableness and qualified immunity. Both sound complicated. Neither has to be.

The standard: objective reasonableness

Excessive force is judged by objective reasonableness under the Fourth Amendment. The question a court asks is not what the officer was thinking or feeling. It is whether a reasonable officer, facing the same facts in the same moment, would have used that much force.

Courts weigh factors like:

• How serious the suspected crime was
• Whether you posed an immediate threat to officers or anyone else
• Whether you were actively resisting or trying to flee
• Whether there were less forceful options available

Because the test is objective, the officer’s good intentions do not save unreasonable force, and your own state of mind is not the issue. What matters is the conduct measured against what a reasonable officer would have done. Force applied after you are handcuffed or already subdued is a common example of force that no reasonable officer needed to use.

How excessive force fits with other claims

Excessive force overlaps heavily with police brutality, which is really excessive force that leaves someone badly hurt. Where the arrest itself lacked probable cause, a false arrest claim can run alongside it. Many of our cases involve more than one of these at once.

Qualified immunity, explained plainly

You will hear the phrase qualified immunity, and it scares people off. Here is what it actually means. Qualified immunity is a defense that can protect an officer from a §1983 lawsuit unless the officer violated a clearly established constitutional right, one that a reasonable officer would have known they were breaking.

In practice, the officer’s lawyers argue the law was not clear enough to put the officer on notice. Our job is to show the opposite: that what the officer did was so plainly out of bounds that any reasonable officer would have known it violated your rights. Qualified immunity is a real hurdle, but it is not a wall. Courts turn it aside when the misconduct is clear, and part of building your case is lining up the facts and prior rulings that defeat it.

The federal claim and its deadlines

Excessive force claims run through 42 U.S.C. §1983, the federal statute for constitutional violations by government actors. Section 1983 can allow recovery of attorney’s fees and punitive damages against individual officers. The claim generally carries a three-year statute of limitations in New York and is not subject to the Notice of Claim rule.

When we pair it with state-law claims, though, the tight state deadline controls: a Notice of Claim within 90 days against the City, NYPD, or a municipality, suit within one year and 90 days, and usually a 50-h hearing first. Here is the Notice of Claim process.

What we recover and how we work

Damages can cover your injuries, medical bills, lost income, and the emotional harm of being brutalized, plus punitive damages against officers when the conduct warrants it. In one police brutality case, our firm secured a $900,000 verdict, including $500,000 in punitive damages. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Sullivan & Brill is partner-led, with eight offices across New York. A partner handles your case, and we pledge to represent you as one of our own. We work on contingency, so there is no fee unless we recover for you, and the consultation is free and confidential. We are here 24/7. Contact us or read our civil rights overview to learn more.