Merritt Sharp, III v. County of Orange
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1DissentN.R. Smith, Circuit Judge
In resolving a claim of qualified immunity, “summary judgment is improper if, resolving all disputes of fact and credibility in favor of the party asserting the injury, (1) the facts adduced show that the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) that right was “clearly established” at the time of the violation.” Kirkpatrick v. Cty. of Washoe, 843 F.3d 784, 788 (9th Cir. 2016) (quoting Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151, 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001)). Applying this precedent here, we must first resolve all factual conflicts in favor of Sharp III. We need not discuss…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San FranciscoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Glenn v. Washington CountyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- James Tracey Miller v. Clark County Edward J. Bylsma, in His Capacity as a Police Officer for Clark County and as an IndividualCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- United States v. Anthony Ruiz Del VizoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Hammer v. GrossCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.