Ben Crump UPenn Lawsuit, Ronald Harmon’s Death, Taser Claims and What Happens Next

On October 19, 2026, Bruce A. Harmon filed a federal lawsuit against the Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania and members of the Penn Police Department over the death of his brother, Ronald I. Harmon, 52. The complaint alleges that a Penn Police officer fired a Taser at Ronald Harmon’s back during a November 5, 2024 foot chase, that he fell and hit his head, and that he died on January 9, 2025.

Civil rights attorney Ben Crump is part of the family’s legal team. The complaint was filed through Gregg Zeff’s firm. [1][2]

These are allegations, not findings. No court has found that Penn or any officer is liable. The university has said it cannot discuss the allegations while the case is pending. [3]

Quick Facts: Bruce A. Harmon v. The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania

Detail	What we know
Case	Bruce A. Harmon v. The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, et al.
Court	U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Case number	2:26-cv-08003-NIQA
Filed	October 19, 2026
Deceased	Ronald I. Harmon, 52
Plaintiff	Bruce A. Harmon, Ronald’s brother, individually and as administrator of his estate
Incident	Taser used during a foot pursuit on November 5, 2024, in West Philadelphia
Death	January 9, 2025
Defendants	The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania; Officers James Squadroni and James Schwartz; unnamed officers and supervisors
Claims	Excessive force (42 U.S.C. § 1983), battery, assault, failure to train and supervise, unconstitutional policies or customs
Attorneys	Gregg Zeff (Zeff Law Firm) filed the complaint; Ben Crump is part of the legal team
Damages	No single dollar amount stated
Class action	No
Status	Newly filed; no liability finding or settlement identified

The case name and number come from the filed complaint, not the early news reports. Some coverage called it “Harmon Estate v. Trustees,” which is not the caption on the complaint. [1]

What Is the Ben Crump UPenn Lawsuit About?

The complaint says Penn Police Officers James Squadroni and James Schwartz saw Ronald Harmon take a small package from a building foyer on the 42nd block of Spruce Street at about 7:20 p.m. on November 5, 2024. Squadroni chased Harmon on foot while Schwartz followed in a police vehicle.

According to the complaint:

• Harmon dropped the package during the chase.
• He saw Schwartz’s vehicle ahead, turned around and ran past Squadroni.
• Squadroni fired a Taser into his back.
• Harmon lost muscle control, fell and hit his head on the curb.
• The complaint quotes the officer’s statement that Harmon “fell forward and [h]it his head on the curve.”

The family alleges Harmon was unarmed, had made no threats and was suspected of at most a low-level property offense. The complaint cites a death record that lists the cause of death as complications of a blunt impact injury to the head and the manner of death as homicide. [1]

A medical examiner’s “homicide” ruling means a death was caused by another person’s actions. It is not a finding of a crime or of civil liability. The complaint does not establish that Harmon was guilty of theft.

Who Is Being Sued in the Ronald Harmon Case?

• The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania: the institutional defendant, accused of failures in police training, supervision, discipline and oversight.
• Officer James Squadroni: accused of firing the Taser. Sued in his individual and official capacities.
• Officer James Schwartz: accused of failing to intervene and of violating foot-pursuit policy.
• Unnamed officers and supervisors: placeholders the plaintiff can later identify through discovery.

Naming someone as a defendant does not mean the person is responsible. The defendants can dispute the allegations and raise legal defenses.

What Laws Does the Ben Crump UPenn Lawsuit Invoke?

1. Excessive force under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Fourth Amendment

Section 1983 lets a person sue someone who, acting under color of state law, violates constitutional rights. Excessive force during a seizure is judged by the Fourth Amendment’s objective reasonableness test from Graham v. Connor (1989). Courts weigh the seriousness of the suspected offense, whether the person posed an immediate threat and whether the person was resisting or fleeing. The family argues a Taser on an unarmed man running from a minor property offense was unreasonable. The officers may argue the force was justified. [4]

2. Pennsylvania battery

Battery is harmful or offensive physical contact without lawful justification.

3. Pennsylvania assault

Assault is an act that puts a person in apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact.

4. Failure to train, supervise or discipline (Monell liability)

Under Monell v. Department of Social Services (1978), an institution can be liable under § 1983 only if an official policy, custom or sufficiently culpable failure to train or supervise caused the violation. It is not enough that an employee is accused of wrongdoing. The complaint alleges inadequate training on force, Taser use, de-escalation, intervention, foot pursuits and medical response.

5. Unconstitutional policies or customs

This count alleges Penn maintained or tolerated practices, including weak oversight of force incidents, that contributed to the harm. Penn can contest whether the plaintiff meets the legal requirements.

Wrongful-death and survival damages under Pennsylvania law

The complaint seeks relief under Pennsylvania’s wrongful death statute, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8301, and survival statute, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8302. A wrongful-death action recovers losses suffered by eligible family beneficiaries. A survival action preserves claims that belonged to the deceased and is brought by the estate. Being the estate’s administrator does not by itself entitle Bruce Harmon to every category of damages. [5]

Related article: CNN Warns Trump White House, Restore Air Force One Access or Face New Legal Action

Can a Private University Police Department Be Sued Under Section 1983?

Section 1983 applies to people acting “under color of state law.” The Penn Police Department is a private university’s police force. Whether its officers act under color of state law depends on whether they were exercising police powers delegated by the state, which the complaint alleges. Penn may contest that, and the availability of qualified immunity to private campus officers is also a legal question that could be disputed. Neither point has been decided. Qualified immunity generally protects officials from damages unless they violated “clearly established” law.

Why Penn Police’s Taser and Foot-Pursuit Policies Matter

The complaint cites three Penn Police directives: Directive 1 (use of force), Directive 2 (authorized weapons and electronic control devices) and Directive 95 (foot pursuits). It alleges they limit Taser use against unarmed people fleeing suspected nonviolent offenses and require officers to weigh the offense, safety risks and whether the person appears armed. [1]

Policy violations are relevant evidence, but an internal policy violation is not automatically a constitutional violation, and following policy does not automatically make force reasonable. The court applies the legal standard to the evidence.

What Compensation Is the Harmon Family Seeking?

The complaint states no single total. It seeks:

• Compensatory damages
• Punitive damages against individual officers, where permitted. Punitive damages are available under § 1983 for reckless or callous indifference to federally protected rights (Smith v. Wade)
• Wrongful-death and survival damages
• Attorneys’ fees and costs under 42 U.S.C. § 1988
• Interest, declaratory relief and other relief
• A jury trial

No award has been made. No settlement, public claim form or compensation program exists for this case.

What Has the University of Pennsylvania Said?

As reported by The Philadelphia Inquirer and NBC10 Philadelphia, Penn extended condolences to the family and said the university and its Division of Public Safety take uses of force and loss of life seriously. It declined to discuss the allegations because the matter is in litigation. That is not an admission or a court ruling. No detailed legal response from Penn or the named officers has been verified. [3]

Did Ben Crump Personally File the Penn Lawsuit?

Ben Crump Law announced the case on October 19, 2026. The complaint on the federal docket was filed through Gregg Zeff of Zeff Law Firm. The Philadelphia Inquirer reported on October 20 that Crump was not yet listed as counsel on the docket and that Zeff said he would be added. Crump is part of the family’s legal team, but the filed complaint identifies Zeff’s firm. [2][3]

Does the Statute of Limitations Matter in the Harmon Case?

Section 1983 claims and Pennsylvania wrongful-death and survival claims generally carry a two-year limit under 42 Pa.C.S. § 5524. The Taser incident was November 5, 2024, and Ronald Harmon died January 9, 2025. The complaint was filed October 19, 2026, within two years of both dates. Timeliness could still be disputed, and the court would decide.

What Happens Next in the Ben Crump UPenn Lawsuit?

1. Service and responses: The defendants must be served and may answer or move to dismiss.
2. Motions to dismiss: They may challenge the legal sufficiency of the claims, including Monell liability, state-actor status and immunity defenses.
3. Discovery: Evidence could include reports, Taser deployment data, medical records, the death investigation, video, witness statements and Penn Police training materials.
4. Experts: Medical experts may address the cause of the head injury. Use-of-force experts may address tactics and training.
5. Settlement or trial: No settlement or trial date has been verified.

Other Ben Crump Police Use-of-Force Cases in 2026

These are separate cases and do not prove the claims in the Harmon lawsuit.

• Billy Gordon (Temple, Texas): Ben Crump Law announced a federal lawsuit on October 7, 2026, alleging a Taser was used four times in an encounter that ended in Gordon’s death in 2024.
• Thomas Farley (Palm Bay, Florida): Ben Crump Law announced a June 2026 federal lawsuit alleging a Taser deployment caused Farley to fall from a fence. [6][7]

For related coverage of other police cases, see Saveion McConnell Police Shooting, Body-Camera Video Released After Missouri Prosecutor Declines Charges, William McNeil Jr. Lawsuit, $100K Federal Case Against Jacksonville Officers After Viral Traffic Stop Beating and City of Buffalo $4.5 Million Police Shooting Settlement, Jose Hernandez-Rossy Case Update. Each involves different facts, evidence and procedural status. The Buffalo settlement is proposed and awaiting a city council vote.

Key Dates in the Ronald Harmon Case

Date	Event
January 25, 1972	Ronald I. Harmon’s birth date, per the complaint
November 5, 2024	Foot pursuit and Taser deployment on Spruce Street
January 9, 2025	Ronald Harmon dies
October 19, 2026	Bruce Harmon files federal lawsuit; Ben Crump Law announces it
October 20, 2026	The Philadelphia Inquirer reports on the filing and Crump’s docket status
October 21, 2026	Reporting cutoff; no response, ruling or settlement verified

Frequently Asked Questions About the Ben Crump UPenn Lawsuit

What is the Ben Crump UPenn lawsuit?

It is a federal civil-rights and wrongful-death lawsuit filed October 19, 2026, by Bruce A. Harmon over his brother Ronald Harmon’s death after a Penn Police Taser deployment in November 2024.

What is the correct name and case number?

Bruce A. Harmon v. The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, et al., No. 2:26-cv-08003-NIQA (E.D. Pa.).

Did the Taser itself kill Ronald Harmon?

The complaint alleges the Taser caused a fall and a head injury that led to his death. Whether the Taser deployment legally caused his death is for the court, with medical evidence.

Why is the University of Pennsylvania being sued?

The Trustees are named for alleged failures in police training, supervision, discipline and policy enforcement. Institutional liability requires meeting the Monell standard.

Did the death certificate say homicide?

The complaint cites a death record listing the manner of death as homicide. That is not a finding of criminal or civil liability.

How much money is the family seeking?

No single total is stated. The complaint seeks compensatory, punitive, wrongful-death and survival damages, fees, costs and interest.

Is it a class action?

No. The claims are brought by the administrator of Ronald Harmon’s estate.

Can other people file a claim or join the lawsuit?

No. There is no public settlement or claim process, and the case concerns Ronald Harmon’s death.

Has Penn admitted wrongdoing?

No. Penn expressed condolences and declined to discuss the case.

Is Ben Crump listed as counsel?

As of the October 20 reporting, he was not yet listed on the docket, and Zeff said he would be added. Crump’s firm has announced his involvement.

When will the case be decided?

No trial date or decision schedule has been verified.

Official Sources and Court Records

1. U.S. District Court, E.D. Pa.: Bruce A. Harmon v. The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, et al., No. 2:26-cv-08003-NIQA, Complaint (October 19, 2026). Complaint
2. Ben Crump Law, October 19, 2026: Announcement of the Ronald Harmon lawsuit
3. The Philadelphia Inquirer, October 20, 2026: Family of man who died after Penn Police used a Taser files wrongful-death suit
4. 42 U.S.C. § 1983: Statute
5. Pennsylvania General Assembly: 42 Pa.C.S. § 8301 and 42 Pa.C.S. § 8302
6. Ben Crump Law: Billy Gordon lawsuit
7. Ben Crump Law: Thomas Farley lawsuit
8. The Daily Pennsylvanian: Renowned civil rights attorney sues Penn over wrongful death

Legal authorities referenced: U.S. Const. amend. IV; 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1988; Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989); Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978); Smith v. Wade, 461 U.S. 30 (1983); 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 5524, 8301, 8302.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. The lawsuit’s allegations are not court findings. AllAboutLawyer.com is a legal information website, not a law firm.

Researched and written by Israr Ahmad, legal content researcher and founder of AllAboutLawyer.com. All facts verified against the complaint in Bruce A. Harmon v. The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, et al., No. 2:26-cv-08003-NIQA, reporting by The Philadelphia Inquirer and Ben Crump Law’s announcements, as of October 21, 2026. Last Updated: October 21, 2026.