Case Background
In September 2023, Michael Grant visited friends at an apartment complex when several police officers from the City of West Memphis arrived to conduct a raid. Grant left the scene, which prompted a foot pursuit by the officers. After the chase, Grant stopped running and surrendered by putting his hands up and lying on the ground. Grant alleged that as soon as he hit the ground, the officers attacked him without cause, stomping on his stomach, back, and side. The incident resulted in serious injuries that required Grant to spend several days in the hospital.
Cause
The legal action stemmed from allegations of assault, battery, and felony aggravated assault. Grant further claimed that the officers violated his state and federal constitutional rights, specifically citing the use of excessive force and a failure by other officers at the scene to intervene during the attack.
Injury
Grant suffered significant physical injuries during the arrest. He claimed these injuries caused him physical and emotional pain, required medical treatment, and led to permanent impairments, lost wages, and a diminished ability to earn a living.
Damages Sought
Grant requested compensatory damages exceeding $1,000,000.00 for his physical and emotional suffering. He also sought punitive damages against the individual officers, asserting their actions were intentional and malicious. Additionally, he asked for a Court order requiring the City of West Memphis to improve its police training and a declaration that the officers' conduct was unconstitutional.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Michael Grant
Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Luther Oneal Sutter | Lucien R. Gillham | Caleb Baumgardner | Rickey H. Hicks
Defendant(s): Jason Kennedy | Ismael Clay | Cecil Langston | Nick McPherson | Cole Strayhorn | Jarreous Johnson
Counsel for Defendant(s): Jenna Adams
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Claims
Grant argued that the individual officers used more force than was necessary and that the City of West Memphis was liable because it failed to properly train and supervise its personnel. He alleged the city-maintained policies or customs that allowed such misconduct to occur without fear of discipline, including an alleged "code of silence" within the department.
Defense
The Defendants denied all allegations of wrongdoing. They admitted that Grant fled and was pursued, but they maintained that any actions taken were objectively reasonable and based on probable cause. They argued that Grant’s own conduct caused any damages he sustained and that they were protected by qualified and statutory immunity. The city specifically denied that it had failed to train its officers or that any department policy led to Grant's alleged injuries.
Jury Verdict
The trial concluded on May 13, 2026, after three days of proceedings. The jury reached a unanimous decision in favor of the defense.
Excessive Force Claim: The jury found in favor of Defendant Cecil Langston on the claim of excessive force.
Assault Claim: The jury found in favor of Defendant Cecil Langston regarding the assault claim.
Battery Claim: The jury found in favor of Defendant Cecil Langston on the battery claim.
Felony Tort Claim: The jury found in favor of Defendant Cecil Langston on the claim for a civil action by a crime victim.
In a special interrogatory, the jury specifically found that Michael Grant did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Cecil Langston had kicked, stomped, or beaten him on September 16, 2023. Consequently, the jury awarded no damages to the Plaintiff. On May 14, 2026, the Court entered a final judgment dismissing Grant’s complaint with prejudice.
Court documents are available upon request at [email protected]
