Legal Opinion
G-69 v. Degnan
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided August 21, 1990No. Civ. A. 86-3282PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BROTMAN, District Judge.
Presently pending is the motion of defendants John Degnan, Irwin Kimmelman, Donald Belsole, T. Barry Goas, and David V. Brody (the “Attorney General defendants”) for summary judgment in this complex civil rights action. The state police defendants have not joined in these motions nor have they filed their own. Resolution of the instant motion revolves around the application of the law of the due process clause, as it exists in the aftermath of DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Servs., 489 U.S. 189, 109 S.Ct. 998, 103 L.Ed.2d 249 (1989), to the…
2Cases cited65 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Matican v. City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008
- G-69 v. DegnanDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1990
- Summar ex rel. Summar v. BennettCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
- Davis v. Fulton County, Ark.District Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1995
- Clarke v. SweeneyDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2004
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.