A local circuit court judge has ruled in favor of the City of Hattiesburg in a case regarding a husband and wife who filed suit after their vehicle was struck by a car that was being pursued by a Hattiesburg Police Department officer.
On Jan. 4, 12th Circuit Court Judge Jon Mark Weathers issued a decision stating the actions of HPD officer Jacob Knight did not rise above simple negligence, that he did not act in reckless disregard of the safety and well-being of the couple in the other vechicle, and the city is entitled to police-protection immunity.
“Police officers are frequently tried in public opinion, but they are grateful for the right to defend themselves in a court of law,” said Hattiesburg attorney Clark Hicks, who handled the case for the city.
The suit states that on Sept. 17, 2017, John and Sandra Tennesen were traveling on U.S. 98 returning home when they turned left on a green arrow onto Westover Drive and attempted to proceed through the intersection. At the same time, a vehicle operated by James Willis was fleeing a pursuit initiated by Knight and was proceeding eastbound on U.S. 98.
Willis was operating his vehicle at a high rate of speed, entered the intersection against a red traffic signal, and collided with the Tennesen vehicle on the passenger side. As a result of the wreck, the Tennesens received personal injuries and extensive damage to their vehicle.
The Tennesens then filed a complaint alleging that the city waived immunity for its acts because the officer – who is a city employee – acted in reckless disregard for the safety and well-being of the Tennesens, who were not engaged in criminal activity at the time of the wreck.
A trial on the matter took place on March 10 and 11, 2020, where Knight was called as an adverse witness. Knight testified that on the day of the wreck, he had received a call relating to a shoplifting incident at Walmart on U.S. 98. Upon arriving, he discovered that the suspect vehicle had left, at which point he began searching for it.
After locating the vehicle, Knight pulled behind the vehicle with the intention of initiating a stop. The driver did not stop the vehicle and shortly after ran a red light with night in pursuit, reaching speeds of more than 60 miles per hour before the suspect vehicle crashed into the Tennesen’s car.
As a result of the accident, the Tennesens both sustained personal injuries, incurred medical expenses, suffered physical and emotional injuries, other specified damages and property damage.
The court found that “the length of the pursuit was short both in time and distance; the character of the neighborhood was commercial; the roadway was well paved and wide with divided lanes; vehicular traffic was relatively light; the weather was clear; the officer was familiar with his vehicle which was in good condition; the officer was proceeding with emergency lights and sirens; neither the officer or his supervisors had sufficient time to evaluate whether or not available alternatives would lead to the apprehension of the suspect besides pursuit … no departmental policy precluded a pursuit under the factual circumstances; and that Knight’s speed was not excessive in light of the speed limit.”
