◆ SpookStack

OPINION OF THE COURT, There is no question that she has stated a cause of action, even though it is unclear whether she also. contends that - there was no probable cause to arrest her son? Williams v. Liberty, 461 F.2d 325, 327 (7th. Cir. 1972); Jenkins v. Averett, 424 F.2d 1228, 1232 (4th Cir. 1970); Delaney v. Dias, 415 F. Supp. 1351, 1353 (D. Mass. 1976). In answering the complaints, all defendants claimed qualified immunity for their actions. The defense of quali- fied immunity, which is available to local, state, and fed- eral law enforcement officers, protects the defendants from liability for damages if they acted with a good faith belief based upon reasonable grounds that the measures they took ‘were necessary. Butz v. Hconomow, 98 S. Ct. 2894, 46 US.L.W. 4952 (June 29, 1978); Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232 (1974) ; Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967). All of the defendants, either expressly or impliedly, also contended that. their actions were fully justified. They further asserted that the plaintiff’s actions for violation of her son’s civil rights did not survive his death. ’ In moving for summary judgment or dismissal, the de-' fendants each filed affidavits of their own, along with affidavits from Agent Henry Foderaro of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the doctor who performed the autopsy, and a state police ballistician. The plaintiff filed three counteraffidavits. Except for memoranda of law, no further materials were ‘filed. The defendants’ affidavits, which are, in the main, un- contradicted, establish the following facts. Jajuga first met Maiorana in January, 1973, while investigating narcotics na ene eee who she said had been an informant, but had threatened to cease such activity and expose illegal activities by the police. The plaintiif’s brief focussed on the claim that the police had been grossly negligent in effecting her son’s arrest. At oral argument, her counsel expressly disavowed any claim that the deceased was deliberately ‘‘set up’? and murdered and relied on gross negli- gence and/or recklessness in the arrest to establish liability. 3 See n. 1, supra. - 3a _ sy gS