Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Gregory Baldwin v. City of Estherville, Iowa

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided June 14, 2019No. 18-1856Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

APPEL, Justice (concurring in part and dissenting in part).

I. Introduction.

In Baldwin v. City of Estherville (Baldwin II ), 915 N.W.2d 259, 281 (Iowa 2018), the majority of this court decided that a government official could assert a modified qualified immunity defense to a state constitutional tort under article I, sections 1 and 8 of the Iowa Constitution. For reasons expressed in my dissenting opinion in *703Baldwin II , I was unable to join the majority opinion. Id. (Appel, J., dissenting). I continue to believe there is no immunity available to shield individual state officers from liability…

2Cases cited38 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  5. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971

33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API