Legal Opinion
Malik v. Hannah
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided June 28, 2011No. Civil 05-3901 (JBS/JS)PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SIMANDLE, District Judge:
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter comes before the Court on the motion for summary judgment of Plaintiff Abdus Salaam Malik. [Docket Item 126.] Because of Defendant City of Camden’s procedural default, there are no material disputes of fact in the record. Consequently, the Court will grant Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment as to Defendant’s liability for its officers’ conduct.
II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The following facts are taken from Plaintiffs statement of undisputed facts and supporting affidavits, submitted in accordance with Local Civil Rule…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Graham v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Scott v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Noble v. City of CamdenDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2015
- Hart v. Electronic Arts, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2011
- ABRAN v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIADistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2020
- BAKER v. CAMARILLODistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2022
- CONROY, BY AND THROUGH ITS ADMINISTRATOR, JENNEY FERGUSON v. CUMBERLAND COUNTYDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2020
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.