Over at Overlawyered, there's this post regarding two cases involving police liability. The first case involves a Normal, Illinois police officer who shot and killed 20-year-old Nathan Ruch after he attempted to run down the officer. The decedent's family claims that since the last shot (which was fatal) went through the car's passenger window, the evidence shows that the officer was no longer justified in discharging his shotgun. One wonders how many of us could display the split-second precise judgment that the plaintiff's suggest the officer should have exercised after almost being run down by a speeding car.

The second case involves the Sixth Circuit's reversal of a trial court's finding of liability when the police failed to arrest a drunk driver who later killed another motorist. As overlawyered quips, why is this a federal case?