Case Summary
**Case Summary: Barton Roberts v. Sergeant Kopel**
**Docket Number:** 8050567
**Court:** [Insert Court Name]
**Date:** [Insert Date of Filing]
**Parties:**
- **Plaintiff:** Barton Roberts
- **Defendant:** Sergeant Kopel
**Background:**
Barton Roberts filed a lawsuit against Sergeant Kopel, alleging misconduct during a police encounter. The circumstances leading to the lawsuit revolve around an incident that occurred on [insert date of incident] when Roberts was stopped by police officers while [insert brief description of the scenario, e.g., walking down the street, driving a vehicle, etc.].
**Facts:**
1. On the day of the incident, Roberts was engaged in [describe activity].
2. Sergeant Kopel and other officers approached Roberts for [insert reason for police intervention, e.g., suspicion of a crime, traffic violation].
3. During the encounter, Roberts claims he was subjected to excessive force, including [insert specific actions taken by Sergeant Kopel, e.g., physical restraint, verbal abuse].
4. Roberts alleges that his civil rights were violated, claiming wrongful arrest and misconduct as per [insert relevant laws, e.g., Fourth Amendment].
5. The defendant, Sergeant Kopel, contends that the force used was reasonable under the circumstances and asserts that the actions taken were in line with police procedure and protocol.
**Legal Issues:**
The primary legal issues in this case include:
- Whether Sergeant Kopel used excessive force during the encounter with Roberts.
- Whether Roberts' civil rights were violated under the constitution and applicable state laws.
- The applicability of qualified immunity for Sergeant Kopel in relation to the claims made by Roberts.
**Arguments:**
- **Plaintiff’s Argument:** Roberts argues that the actions of Sergeant Kopel were not justified and violated his rights, seeking damages for the emotional distress and physical harm endured during the incident.
- **Defendant’s Argument:** Sergeant Kopel argues that the force employed was reasonable given the circumstances and that he is entitled to qualified immunity as he acted within the bounds of the law and police policy.
**Outcome:**
[Insert outcome if available, e.g., ruling on motions, trial verdict, settlement, etc. If the case is ongoing or there is no final verdict, note that the case is pending and future proceedings are expected.]
**Conclusion:**
The case of Barton Roberts v. Sergeant Kopel addresses critical issues regarding police conduct, the use of force, and the protection of individual rights under the law. The outcome will have implications for similar cases concerning alleged police misconduct and the scope of qualified immunity for law enforcement officers.
(Note: The case details, such as dates, specific claims, and legal arguments, should be filled in based on actual case information, which is not provided here.)