## Facts

- Robert Russ, a 22-year-old college student, was shot and killed by Chicago police officer Van B. Watts after a late-night traffic stop attempt led to a high-speed chase and crash.
- Officer Phillip Banazkiewicz initiated the attempted stop; Watts and Cook County deputy sheriff Robert Helson joined the pursuit in separate vehicles.
- The chase ended after Russ’s vehicle collided with police vehicles; officers surrounded Russ’s car with weapons drawn.
- The circumstances immediately preceding the shooting were disputed, but the federal appeal was decided on a legal question without resolving factual disputes about the shooting.
- Separately, Russ’s infant child (through the child’s mother) pursued state-law claims and obtained a substantial verdict.
- Russ’s parents, Isaac Russ and Vera Love, filed a federal action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking damages for deprivation of their relationship with their adult son.

## Issues

1. Whether the Due Process Clause (via 42 U.S.C. § 1983) recognizes a parental liberty interest allowing parents to recover for loss of the society and companionship of an adult child killed by law enforcement.
2. Whether circuit precedent recognizing such a claim should be retained or overruled.

## Decision

- The court affirmed summary judgment for the defendants.
- The court held that the federal Constitution does not provide parents a substantive due process cause of action under § 1983 for loss of the society and companionship of an adult child killed by police.
- The court overruled prior circuit precedent that had recognized such a constitutional claim.

## Legal Principles

- Substantive due process protects certain family-related interests primarily against direct state interference with parental decision-making concerning minor children (e.g., care, custody, and control), not a general right to recover for a relative’s injury or death.
- Section 1983 generally provides a remedy to the person whose own constitutional rights were violated; derivative injuries to family members, standing alone, do not create independent constitutional claims.
- Federal substantive due process should not be expanded to function as a general wrongful-death or tort remedy when state law provides mechanisms for such recovery.
- Prior circuit authority recognizing a § 1983 parental companionship claim for an adult child’s death was inconsistent with controlling doctrine and was therefore rejected.

## Conclusion

The Seventh Circuit held that parents may not use § 1983 and substantive due process to recover for loss of the society and companionship of an adult child killed by police, limiting constitutional recovery to the direct victim (or legally authorized representatives) and leaving relational-loss remedies to state law.


Russ v. Watts, 414 F.3d 783 (7th Cir. 2005)