Ben Crump Files Lawsuit Against University of Pennsylvania
The legal action follows the death of 52-year-old Ronald Harmon after a police Taser encounter.
Updated on Oct. 20, 2026 in Financial Crime
Civil rights attorney Ben Crump has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the University of Pennsylvania and its police department. The legal action addresses the 2024 death of 52-year-old Ronald Harmon, who suffered a fatal head injury during an encounter with campus police.
Why it matters
The lawsuit centers on the use of force by university law enforcement and the subsequent loss of life. It raises significant questions regarding the protocols governing the deployment of Tasers by campus security personnel.
A wrongful death lawsuit has been formally filed in federal court regarding the death of 52-year-old Ronald Harmon. The litigation is currently in its early stages as it proceeds through the federal judicial system.
The players
Ben Crump
A prominent civil rights attorney known for representing families in high-profile wrongful death and police misconduct cases.
Ronald Harmon
A 52-year-old man who died after a Taser encounter with campus police at the University of Pennsylvania.
University of Pennsylvania
A private Ivy League research university in Philadelphia that oversees the campus police department named in the suit.
The details
According to the filing, a University of Pennsylvania police officer deployed a Taser at Ronald Harmon while he was running away. The lawsuit alleges that Harmon fell and sustained a fatal head injury as a direct result of the Taser discharge.
Timeline
Nov. 5, 2024: Ronald Harmon sustained a head injury from a Taser.
Oct. 19, 2026: Ben Crump announced the lawsuit filing.
Legal Context
This litigation contributes to an ongoing national trend of civil rights challenges targeting institutional use-of-force policies. It follows a pattern set by the 2020 landmark police reform legislation, which intensified judicial scrutiny of police interactions.
The lawsuit brings heightened public attention to the use of non-lethal weapons by campus security forces in Philadelphia. Residents and local stakeholders may monitor the proceedings for potential shifts in campus law enforcement training requirements.
The takeaway
This case underscores the intense scrutiny surrounding the deployment of Tasers in non-imminent threat situations. Families pursuing litigation often seek both accountability and changes to institutional use-of-force protocols.
Further reading
For more information on legal proceedings and systemic oversight, see Financial Crime.
