Yes, certain surviving family members or a deceased person’s estate may be able to sue police officers, a city, or another government entity when excessive force or a dangerous restraint causes or contributes to a death.
These cases may involve federal civil rights claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, state wrongful death and survival claims, or both. However, a death during a police encounter does not automatically establish liability. The plaintiffs generally must prove that the force was legally unreasonable, that it caused or contributed to the death, and that the proper person or estate filed the claim within the applicable deadlines.
Cases involving chokeholds, neck restraints, body weight, or prolonged face-down restraint may require close examination of body-camera footage, medical findings, officer training, the person’s behavior, and what officers did after the person was restrained.
When Can a Family Sue Police for Wrongful Death?
A police wrongful death lawsuit may be possible when evidence indicates that an officer’s unlawful conduct caused or substantially contributed to a person’s death.
Depending on the facts and jurisdiction, potentially actionable conduct may include:
- Using force that was unreasonable under the circumstances
- Applying pressure to the neck, back, chest, or torso while someone was face-down
- Continuing to use force after a person was handcuffed or controlled
- Failing to respond when a restrained person said they could not breathe
- Ignoring visible signs of medical distress
- Failing to intervene when another officer used unlawful force
- Delaying necessary emergency medical assistance
- Using a chokehold or restraint prohibited by state law or department policy
- Failing to train or supervise officers concerning dangerous restraints
- Following a municipal policy or custom that caused a constitutional violation
Whether a lawsuit is viable depends on the entire encounter. Courts consider what officers knew at the time, the threat they reasonably perceived, whether the person was resisting, the seriousness of the suspected offense, the amount and duration of force, and whether officers attempted to limit the force used.
For a free legal consultation, call 800-593-3443
What Is a Section 1983 Wrongful Death Claim?
42 U.S.C. § 1983 allows people to pursue civil relief when someone acting under color of state law deprives them of a right protected by the U.S. Constitution or federal law.
In a fatal police-force case, a Section 1983 lawsuit may allege that an officer violated the deceased person’s Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable seizure. Related claims may concern an officer’s failure to intervene, denial of necessary medical care, or interference with a family’s constitutional rights.
A successful claim generally requires more than showing that someone died after police used force. The plaintiffs must connect the defendants’ conduct to a legally recognized constitutional violation and establish causation.
The exact constitutional standard can depend on when the force occurred. For example, force used during an arrest or traffic stop is generally evaluated under the Fourth Amendment. Different constitutional standards may apply after someone has been detained or incarcerated.
How Do Courts Decide Whether Police Used Excessive Force?
Courts generally ask whether the officer’s actions were objectively reasonable based on the facts and circumstances confronting the officer.
This is a fact-specific inquiry. It does not depend solely on whether the officer said the force was necessary or whether the person experienced a serious injury.
Important considerations may include:
- The severity of the suspected offense
- Whether the person posed an immediate threat
- Whether the person was actively resisting or attempting to flee
- Whether the person was armed
- How many officers were present
- The kind and amount of force used
- How long the force continued
- Whether the person was already restrained
- Whether officers attempted de-escalation
- Whether the person was experiencing a mental-health crisis
- Whether the person communicated breathing difficulty
- Whether officers followed their training and department policies
- How quickly officers recognized and responded to medical distress
The same restraint may be reasonable under one set of circumstances and excessive under another. An attorney must therefore evaluate the entire encounter, rather than one isolated moment.
Click to contact our personal injury lawyers today
Is Prone Restraint Illegal?
Prone restraint means restraining someone in a face-down position. It is not automatically unconstitutional in every situation, but its manner, intensity, and duration can make it dangerous and potentially unlawful.
In Lombardo v. City of St. Louis, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a mechanical rule that prone restraint is reasonable whenever a person appears to resist. The Court explained that the analysis must consider the specific circumstances, including:
- Whether the person was already handcuffed or shackled
- Whether pressure was applied to the person’s back or torso
- How long the restraint continued
- The person’s physical condition
- The level of resistance
- Warnings that the restraint could interfere with breathing
- Whether officers tried to reduce the amount of force
The Court did not decide that all prone restraint is unconstitutional. Instead, it emphasized that resistance alone does not settle the question. The nature and duration of the restraint still matter. Read the Supreme Court’s opinion in Lombardo.
California law provides additional restrictions. California Government Code § 7286.5 prohibits law enforcement agencies from authorizing chokeholds, carotid restraints, or techniques and transportation methods that involve a substantial risk of positional asphyxia.
A violation of state law or department policy may be important evidence. However, it does not automatically prove every element of a federal civil rights claim.
Complete a Free Case Evaluation form now
Can You Sue If the Person Was Resisting Arrest?
Possibly. Resistance is an important factor, but it does not give officers unlimited authority to use force.
Officers may be permitted to use reasonable force to control a person who is actively resisting. However, the legal justification for force may decrease when the person is handcuffed, restrained, no longer resisting, unconscious, or otherwise under control.
Questions may include:
- What type of resistance occurred?
- Did the person pose an immediate threat?
- Did resistance continue after handcuffing?
- Was the force proportional to the resistance?
- Did officers reduce the force once the person was controlled?
- Did apparent “resistance” reflect panic, breathing difficulty, or medical distress?
- Did officers continue applying pressure after the person stopped moving?
Video evidence can be especially important because witnesses and officers may describe resistance differently.
Can a Family Sue If Drugs or Heart Disease Contributed to the Death?
The presence of drugs, cardiovascular disease, or another medical condition does not necessarily prevent a civil rights or wrongful death lawsuit.
The critical issue is usually causation: Did the officer’s conduct cause or contribute to the death under the legal standard that governs the claim?
Medical experts may need to evaluate:
- The autopsy and toxicology findings
- The person’s underlying health conditions
- The physical effects of the restraint
- Whether pressure restricted breathing or circulation
- When the person became unresponsive
- Whether earlier repositioning or medical treatment could have changed the outcome
- Whether the death would have occurred without the challenged force
Defendants may argue that drugs or preexisting disease—not police conduct—caused the death. Plaintiffs may contend that restraint, neck pressure, chest compression, delayed medical care, or another use of force caused or materially contributed to it.
These disputes are typically decided using medical records, video, witness accounts, forensic evidence, and expert testimony.
The medical examiner’s classification is relevant but does not decide civil liability by itself. A homicide classification describes the manner of death for medical purposes; it does not automatically establish that an officer committed a crime or is legally responsible for damages.
Who Can Be Named in a Police Wrongful Death Lawsuit?
Potential defendants may include:
- The officer who allegedly used excessive force
- An officer who allegedly failed to intervene
- A supervising officer
- A city, county, or other government entity
- Officials responsible for a policy or training decision, when legally supported
- Other public employees whose conduct allegedly contributed to the death
A police department may not always be a separate legal entity capable of being sued. In some jurisdictions, the proper government defendant may be the city or county that operates the department.
An attorney must identify the correct defendants and determine which legal theories apply to each one.
When Can a City Be Held Liable?
A city is not automatically liable under Section 1983 merely because it employed an officer accused of using excessive force.
A municipal claim, commonly called a Monell claim, generally requires evidence that a government policy, established custom, deliberate training failure, or a qualifying decision caused the constitutional violation.
Relevant evidence might include:
- Written use-of-force policies
- Training on prone restraint and positional asphyxia
- Prior similar incidents
- Complaints against officers
- Disciplinary and supervisory records
- Instructions from policymakers
- A repeated failure to investigate alleged misconduct
- Approval or ratification of unconstitutional conduct
Proof that one officer acted improperly may support an individual claim without necessarily establishing municipal liability. Claims against the government entity require their own factual and legal foundation.
What Is a Failure-to-Intervene Claim?
An officer who did not personally apply the force may still face a claim if the officer had a realistic opportunity to prevent another officer’s constitutional violation but failed to act.
Evidence relevant to a failure-to-intervene claim can include:
- Where the officer was positioned
- What the officer could see or hear
- How long the force continued
- Whether the officer participated in the restraint
- Whether the officer told another officer to stop
- Whether there was enough time to intervene
- Whether the person showed obvious signs of distress
An officer generally cannot be liable for failing to prevent conduct that occurred too quickly for intervention. These claims depend heavily on timing and video evidence.
What Is the Difference Between Wrongful Death and a Survival Claim?
Although they may be filed together, wrongful death and survival claims serve different purposes.
A wrongful death claim generally seeks compensation for losses suffered by qualifying surviving family members because of the death. Eligibility to file is controlled by state law.
For example, California Code of Civil Procedure § 377.60 identifies people who may bring a California wrongful death claim, including a surviving spouse, domestic partner, children, and certain other qualifying relatives or dependents.
A survival claim generally preserves a cause of action the deceased person could have brought had they lived. Under California Code of Civil Procedure § 377.30, that claim may be pursued by the decedent’s personal representative or, in qualifying circumstances, a successor in interest.
The recoverable damages can differ between wrongful death, survival, and federal civil rights claims. Learn more about compensation that may be available in a police wrongful death or excessive force lawsuit.
What Evidence Can Help Establish a Police Wrongful Death Claim?
Families should try to preserve all available evidence, including:
- Body-camera and dash-camera footage
- Bystander videos
- Surveillance recordings
- 911 calls and dispatch communications
- Police reports
- Use-of-force reports
- Autopsy and toxicology findings
- Hospital and emergency medical records
- Photographs of injuries
- Witness names and contact information
- Officer training materials
- Department policies
- Communications between officers and supervisors
- Prior complaints or similar incidents, when legally obtainable
Government agencies may not retain every recording indefinitely. A lawyer can send preservation notices and pursue records through litigation, public records procedures, or other lawful means.
Families should avoid editing original video or audio files. Preserve the original files, their metadata, and any messages showing when and how they were received.
How Long Do Families Have to File?
Deadlines in police wrongful death cases can be unusually complicated because federal civil rights claims and state-law claims may follow different rules.
California’s general statute of limitations provides two years for certain actions involving injury or death caused by another person’s wrongful act or neglect. However, claims against a California public entity or employee may involve much shorter administrative deadlines.
Under California Government Code § 911.2, a claim involving personal injury or death generally must be presented to the public entity within six months after the claim accrues.
That administrative requirement generally concerns state-law claims against public entities and employees. Federal Section 1983 claims follow separate rules, although their filing periods may be governed by state law. Questions involving accrual, delayed discovery, minors, estates, rejected government claims, and other exceptions can change the analysis.
Families should not assume they have two years—or any other standard period—without obtaining advice specific to the jurisdiction and potential defendants.
The Diego Rios Lawsuit Illustrates These Legal Questions
The family and estate of Diego Rios filed a federal civil rights lawsuit after his death following a November 28, 2025, Claremont, California, traffic stop.
The complaint alleges that Claremont police officers used a chokehold and applied body weight to Rios’ neck, chest, back, and upper torso while he was face-down. The family also alleges that officers failed to respond adequately to signs of mental distress and breathing difficulty.
The Los Angeles County Medical Examiner listed cardiopulmonary arrest due to cocaine effects and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in the setting of prone physical restraint and classified the manner of death as homicide.
Those findings do not establish civil or criminal liability by themselves. The defendants may dispute the allegations, the reasonableness of the force, and whether the restraint caused or contributed to the death.
Read more about the allegations and procedural status of the Diego Rios civil rights lawsuit.
Ben Crump Law does not represent the Rios family. The lawsuit is discussed as a current example of the legal issues that may arise after a fatal police restraint.
Ben Crump Law’s Experience With Fatal-Force Cases
Ben Crump Law has represented families in civil rights and wrongful death cases involving alleged restraint, breathing restriction, failures to intervene, mental-health emergencies, and deaths in custody.
In the Charles Adair civil rights and wrongful death lawsuit, the firm alleges that deputies placed Adair face-down and applied body weight to his back, restricting his breathing. The coroner determined that Adair died from complications of mechanical asphyxia and classified the manner of death as homicide.
Ben Crump Law also filed a lawsuit concerning the death of Rolin Hill. That complaint alleges that deputies beat Hill during a mental-health crisis, applied a knee to his neck, failed to intervene, and denied him adequate medical care.
These are separate cases, each with its own allegations, evidence, defendants, and controlling law. They do not predict the outcome of another case.
Speak With a Civil Rights Lawyer About a Fatal Police Encounter
Police wrongful death cases can involve overlapping constitutional claims, state-law causes of action, government-notice requirements, medical causation disputes, and evidence that may be controlled by the agency involved.
Ben Crump Law’s civil rights attorneys can review the circumstances of a fatal police encounter and determine what legal options may be available. Families can also learn more about filing a claim through the firm’s wrongful death resources.
Call Ben Crump Law at 800-959-1444 or submit an online case evaluation. Consultations are free, and there are no fees until the firm wins. Every case is evaluated according to its facts, evidence, filing deadlines, jurisdiction, and applicable law.
Call or text 800-593-3443 or complete a Free Case Evaluation form
