The Garner doctrine permits shareholders who bring a lawsuit on behalf of a corporation to obtain confidential communications between a corporate officer and the corporation’s attorney, but only if there is a valid reason for doing so and attorney work product is not included. A derivative action is a legal action initiated by a beneficiary of a fiduciary to enforce the fiduciary’s rights, such as a shareholder suing a corporation on its behalf. It can also refer to a lawsuit resulting from harm to another person, such as a husband suing for loss of consortium due to his wife’s injury caused by a third party.
The Garner doctrine is a rule that grants shareholders the ability to obtain confidential communications between a corporate officer and the corporation’s attorney when they bring a derivative action on behalf of the corporation. However, this rule does not extend to attorney work product, and the shareholder must demonstrate good cause. If a shareholder believes that a corporate officer has violated their fiduciary duty to the corporation, they can initiate a derivative action and utilise the Garner doctrine to access confidential communications between the officer and the corporation’s attorney as evidence. Another example of a derivative action is when a husband files a lawsuit for loss of consortium resulting from his wife’s injury caused by a third party. This type of action is considered derivative because the husband is seeking to enforce a right that belongs to his wife. In summary, the Garner doctrine serves as a crucial tool for shareholders to hold corporate officers accountable for their actions and safeguard the corporation’s interests.
The Garner Doctrine, also known as the “fleeing felon rule,” is a legal principle that allows law enforcement officers to use deadly force to apprehend a fleeing suspect if the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others.
Law enforcement officers can use deadly force under the Garner Doctrine when they have a reasonable belief that the fleeing suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others.
Factors such as the severity of the crime committed by the suspect, the immediate threat posed by the suspect, and the potential danger to the public are considered in determining whether the use of deadly force is justified under the Garner Doctrine.
No, law enforcement officers can only use deadly force under the Garner Doctrine if they have a reasonable belief that the fleeing suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others.
Yes, the use of deadly force under the Garner Doctrine must be objectively reasonable based on the circumstances known to the officer at the time. It cannot be excessive or disproportionate to the threat posed by the suspect.
Law enforcement officers can be held liable for using deadly force under the Garner Doctrine if their actions are found to be unreasonable or in violation of the suspect’s constitutional rights.
Yes, law enforcement officers are generally required to consider and use less lethal alternatives, such as verbal commands, physical force, or non-lethal weapons, before resorting to deadly force under the Garner Doctrine.
Yes, the application of the Garner Doctrine can vary among jurisdictions, as it is influenced by state laws, court interpretations, and departmental policies.
Yes, the use of deadly force under the Garner Doctrine can be challenged in court if it is believed to be excessive or in violation of the suspect’s constitutional rights. Courts will review the circumstances surrounding the use of force to determine its reasonableness.
Yes, the Garner Doctrine gained significant attention and scrutiny following the landmark Supreme Court case Tennessee v. Garner (1985), where the Court held that the use of deadly force to apprehend a fleeing suspect is unconstitutional if the suspect does not pose a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm. This case established important guidelines for the use of deadly force under the Garner Doctrine.
This site contains general legal information but does not constitute professional legal advice for your particular situation. Persuing this glossary does not create an attorney-client or legal adviser relationship. If you have specific questions, please consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
This glossary post was last updated: 17th April 2024.
To help you cite our definitions in your bibliography, here is the proper citation layout for the three major formatting styles, with all of the relevant information filled in.
- Page URL:https://dlssolicitors.com/define/garner-doctrine/
- Modern Language Association (MLA):Garner Doctrine. dlssolicitors.com. DLS Solicitors. May 09 2024 https://dlssolicitors.com/define/garner-doctrine/.
- Chicago Manual of Style (CMS):Garner Doctrine. dlssolicitors.com. DLS Solicitors. https://dlssolicitors.com/define/garner-doctrine/ (accessed: May 09 2024).
- American Psychological Association (APA):Garner Doctrine. dlssolicitors.com. Retrieved May 09 2024, from dlssolicitors.com website: https://dlssolicitors.com/define/garner-doctrine/
Our team of professionals are based in Alderley Edge, Cheshire. We offer clear, specialist legal advice in all matters relating to Family Law, Wills, Trusts, Probate, Lasting Power of Attorney and Court of Protection.
All author posts