Legal Opinion
Grooms v. Marshall
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided March 20, 2001No. 99CV671PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
MARBLEY, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment Filed on Behalf of Defendants Marshall, Hudson, Jagers, Freeman, May, Reitz, Brink, Gibson, and Vander Wissel. The case is in federal court on the basis of federal question jurisdiction. The action stems from the questioning of Plaintiffs by two Defendant police officers, and the subsequent indictment of Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs David E. Grooms and William Darrell Lunsford bring suit against Colonel Kenneth B. Marshall, Sergeant H.W. Hudson, III, Trooper J.S. Jagers, Captain Forrest…
2Cases cited36 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
- Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- OFFINEER v. KellyDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2010