◆ SpookStack

4 Nos. 77-1698, 77-1210 & 77-1370 Thereafter plaintiffs requested this court to supplement its mandate by directing that the case be reassigned to another judge for trial. We denied the request, In December 1974 plaintiffs amended their complaint by naming four additional defendants, all connected with the federal government. In October 1975 plaintiffs. moved to have the district judge recuse himself or to reassign the case. The motion was heard by another district judge and was denied. The trial began January 5, 1976 and lasted approximately eighteen months. Thirty-seven thousand pages of testimony were taken. At the conclusion of plaintiffs’ evidence, defend- ants moved for directed verdicts with costs. The motion was granted except for the seven police officers directly partici- pating in the shooting incident, the court ruling “that no prima facie case of a conspiracy or joint venture has been established as alleged in the Amended Complaint... .” ‘The trial. continued as to the seven remaining defen- dants and at its conclusion the case was submitted to the jury. After three days’ deliberation the jury an- nounced it was deadlocked. The trial judge then directed . verdicts in favor of these defendants and assessed costs against plaintiffs for $100,000. This appeal followed. During thé trial, Jeffrey H. Haas and G. Flint Taylor, attorneys for the plaintiffs, were found guilty of contemptuous conduct in the courtroom. They appeal from the contempt judgments. The principal issue on appeal is whether the trial judge erred in directing verdicts for the defendants. We are convinced that he did err. Among the other issues presented which we deem necessary to discuss are the breadth of the official immunity available to defendants, the scope of discovery, the circumstances of the issuance of the search warrant, the companion diversity action filed by Verlina Brewer, the attorneys’ fees and costs, and the contempt judgments. Before a discussion of the directed verdicts and these other issues, -we believe it would be helpful to list the names of the defendants and to summarize the amended complaint, re