Nineteen-year-old Niko Husband went to a dance party with his friends. The organizers rented a fraternal lodge and provided security. Attendees were patted down by security as they entered the party. There was no alcohol served. A disc jockey played music, and everyone was dancing. The party ended abruptly when police arrived and announced to the crowd that the party was over. Officer Proano and his team had received a radio call that a man with an AK-47 was running towards 80th Street and Ashland Avenue-the same location as the dance party. The suspect with the AK-47 was radioed to be a black male with dreadlocks wearing a white shirt and white or khaki shorts. Officers approached the party and told the security guards that they were looking for a man with an AK-47. The security guards told the officers that the suspect was not inside because they had patted down everyone prior to entry. The police ended the party and searched partygoers as they exited. As Niko Husband exited the party, he was immediately behind and had his arms around a female friend, Keoni Jackson. Husband was wearing a bright green T-shirt and blue jeans. Officer Proano knew Husband did not meet the description of the suspect from the radio call. In Officer Proano's judgment and the judgment of other officers, Jackson appeared distressed or panicked by Husband's contact. The officers instructed Husband to take his arms off Jackson and to let her go. Husband did not obey the order. Officer Whigham testified that Husband shoved him and refused to let go of Jackson. Officers threw both Husband and Jackson against the wall and started to forcefully separate them. A struggle ensued. Officer Proano testified that when he put his arm between Husband and Jackson, he felt a gun around Husband's waist area and then placed his left hand directly on the gun. Husband's T-shirt was covering the gun. Officer Proano testified that he could not pull the weapon from Husband's waistband due to the struggle, but yelled out 'gun, gun, gun, he's got a gun' to alert his fellow officers. Officer Whigham used his Taser three or four times on Husband, causing him to fall to the floor on his back. Officers Proano, Whigham, and Piper were directly involved in the struggle with four other officers surrounding them in close proximity. Three officers attempted to gain control of his arms to prevent Husband from reaching into his waistband. Husband flailed violently and uncontrollably. The officers were unable to control Husband. Officer Proano testified that he saw Husband prop himself up with his elbows and reach into his waistband. Husband then pulled out a gun and pointed it at Officer Piper, so the Officer shot Husband three times in the chest. All three officers involved in the struggle testified that they believed Husband was going to shoot Officer Piper before being shot by Officer Proano. Husband died. While the altercation had taken place, Officers described being surrounded by the crowd and even believed that the crowd might try to get involved in the struggle with Husband. The three officers attempting to subdue Husband claim that they saw him pull a gun and point it at Officer Piper. The other four officers on the scene did not see Husband with a weapon. Jackson and Husband's friend testified that he did not have a gun and that they did not see a gun in Husband's waistband as he danced at the party with his shirt off. P questioned the chain of custody of the gun that Husband was accused of possessing. The recovered gun was a semi-automatic with a single round in the chamber. No physical evidence tied the gun to Husband. The only evidence that Husband had a gun was the testimony of the three officers. P as the administrator of Husband's estate, filed this wrongful death case. P presented expert testimony at trial. Special interrogatory No. 1 asked the jury, 'When Officer Proano shot Niko Husband did Officer Marco Proano reasonably believe that Niko Husband's actions placed him or his fellow officers in imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm?' Special interrogatory No. 2 asked the jury, 'Was officer Proano's conduct in shooting Niko Husband willful and wanton?' The jury returned a general verdict in favor of P and awarded $3.5 million in damages. The jury answered 'yes' to both special interrogatories. The trial court found that the jury's answer to the first special interrogatory controlled the general verdict. The trial court entered judgment in favor of Ds, holding that the jury's special finding that Officer Proano's belief that Husband's actions placed him or his fellow officers in imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm required the general verdict to be set aside. P appealed.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The applicable rule of law for this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.