JENNIFER KILNAPP v. CITY OF CLEVELAND, OHIO, BAILEY GANNON - Articles

All Content

JENNIFER KILNAPP v. CITY OF CLEVELAND, OHIO, BAILEY GANNON

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Feb 18, 2026

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: James R. Russell, Jr., CITY OF CLEVELAND, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: Matthew D. Besser, BOLEK BESSER GLESIUS LLC, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: James R. Russell, Jr., Affan Ali, CITY OF CLEVELAND, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellant.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Matthew D. Besser, BOLEK BESSER GLESIUS LLC, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellee.

Judge(s): MOORE, BUSH, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff Jennifer Kilnapp brought this action against Defendants Bailey Gannon and the City of Cleveland, alleging in relevant part that Gannon used excessive force against her in violation of her Fourth Amendment rights when he shot her while the two were on duty as City of Cleveland police officers. Gannon intentionally fired his weapon in response to the threat posed by a suspect. He did not specifically intend to shoot Kilnapp. But that latter fact is immaterial to the question of whether Kilnapp was seized. We hold today that when an officer intentionally shoots their firearm in circumstances that objectively manifest an intent to restrain, any individual struck by the bullet is thereby seized, regardless of whether that individual was the officer’s specific intended target. Because this law was not clearly established at the time of Kilnapp’s shooting, however, we conclude that Gannon is entitled to qualified immunity on Kilnapp’s Fourth Amendment claim. We therefore VACATE the decision of the district court and REMAND for further proceedings.

Attachments: