A motorist sues a police officer for excessive force during an arrest. What is the significance of an order denying the officer's immunity?

The significance of an order denying a police officer's immunity in the context of a lawsuit for excessive force lies in its classification as an appealable collateral order. This means that, although it is not a final determination of the case, the issue of qualified immunity is sufficiently important that it allows for immediate appeal.

Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that protects government officials, including police officers, from being held personally liable for constitutional violations, like excessive force, unless they violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right. When a court denies immunity, it essentially allows the litigation against the officer to proceed, which might expose them to significant legal liability.

Recognizing this, appellate courts have developed a doctrine that allows for appeals from certain rulings, like those denying qualified immunity, even before the case itself has concluded. This is critical because it ensures that public officials can effectively perform their roles without the fear of litigation undermining their duties, provided they have not breached established legal standards.

In this case, the option correctly identifies that the denial of immunity can be appealed immediately, distinguishing it from routine trial court rulings that typically await a final judgment before appellate review. Therefore, the option emphasizes the procedural intricacies surrounding immunity claims and their immediate importance in civil litigation involving