Legal Opinion
Chiketta Tinker v. Perry Beasley
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Decided November 10, 2005No. 04-14597PublishedCited by 43 opinions
1Per curiam
Defendants-appellants, Perry Beasley and Dan Watson, appeal the district court’s denial of their motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity and discretionary-function immunity. The appeal requires us to address: (1) whether the coercive questioning of plaintiff-appel-lee, Chiketta Tinker, by Beasley and Watson, constitutes a violation of Tinker’s substantive due process rights even though it did not result in a confession or other self-incrimination; and (2) whether the coercive questioning rises to a level sufficient to constitute the tort of outrage under Alabama law. 1 We…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- County of Sacramento v. LewisSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Rochin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Ingraham v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Moran v. BurbineSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- Goebert v. Lee CountyCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2007
- Cairel v. AlderdenCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2016
- Adam Keith Waldman v. Alabama Prison CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2017
- Fox v. HayesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
- Knight Ex Rel. Kerr v. Miami-Dade CountyCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2017
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.