Rodgers v. Horsley
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
1Per curiam
Defendants, John T. Bartlett and Phil Boyd, appeal the district court’s order denying motions for summary judgment based upon the doctrine of qualified immunity in a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. We reverse.
BACKGROUND
In considering the denial of a defendant’s summary judgment motion, we are required to view the facts,' which are drawn from the pleadings, affidavits, and depositions, in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. E.g., Hardin v. Hayes, 957 F.2d 845, 848 (11th Cir.1982). As a result, the “facts” for purposes of reviewing rulings on summary judgment motions may not,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Anderson v. CreightonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Mitchell v. ForsythSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Youngberg v. Romeo Ex Rel. RomeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Post v. City of Fort LauderdaleCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1993
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Dolihite v. MaughonCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1996
- Almand v. DeKalb County, GeorgiaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1997
- Hartsfield v. LemacksCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1995
- Hartsfield v. LemacksCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1995
- Jack v. Glaxo Wellcome, Inc.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 2002
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.