Cozzo v. Tangipahoa Parish Council-President Government
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
CARL E. STEWART, Circuit Judge:
Defendants-Appellants, Sheriff J.E. Layrisson (“Sheriff Layrisson” or “Layris-son”) and Deputy Ronald Joiner (“Deputy Joiner” or “Joiner”), claim that the district court erred by denying their motion for a judgment as a matter of law or, in the alternative, for a new trial regarding the jury verdict in favor of Plaintiff-Appellee Mary Dimm Cozzo (“Ms.Cozzo”), finding that Joiner deprived Ms. Cozzo of her constitutional rights and that Layrisson was deliberately indifferent to that deprivation. For the reasons assigned herein, we affirm the district court in part…
2Cases cited59 opinions
- Anderson v. CreightonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- City of Canton v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Hudson v. PalmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Board of the County Commissioners of Bryan County v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Malley v. BriggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Cozzo v. Tangipahoa Parish CouncilCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2001
- Hill v. City of Seven PointsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2002
- Hooker v. Victoria's SecretCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2001