Legal Opinion
Francisco v. Schmidt
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Decided December 16, 1983No. Civ. A. 81-C-44PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ORDER
REYNOLDS, Chief Judge.
This is an action under the doctrine established in Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619. On February 23, 1982, the Court granted summary judgment for the defendants with respect to plaintiff’s Fifth Amendment claim. 532 F.Supp. 850. However, I declined to enter judgment for the defendants on plaintiff’s First Amendment claim. The defendants’ motion to reconsider that order was denied on May 6, 1982. The defendants have renewed their efforts to persuade the Court that the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Davis v. PassmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Carlson v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Bush v. LucasSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Charles E. Egger v. Harlan C. PhillipsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Frank K. Kotarski v. V.L. Cooper, A.E. Navarro, W.J. Tinston, J.H. Kirkpatrick, Naval Air Rework Facility, Capt. P.A. Monroe, in His Official CapacityCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Michael Booher v. United States Postal ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988
- Harding v. United States Postal ServiceDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · 1985
- Dailey v. CarlinDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1987
- Harris v. MoyerDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1985
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.