Legal Opinion
Piphus v. Blum
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided December 29, 1995No. C-940265PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Gorman, Presiding Judge.
Defendants-appellants, the police chief of the village of Lockland, Donald Blum, and two of his patrol officers, Mark Reiber and Scott Witsken, appeal the trial court’s order denying them summary judgment on qualified-immunity grounds in this civil rights action brought by plaintiffs-appellees under Section 1983, Title 42, U.S.Code., 1 and under state tort claims. In a single assignment of error, appellants claim that by applying an incorrect test to determine whether the affirmative defense of qualified immunity was available, the trial court erred in denying them…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Mitchell v. ForsythSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Malley v. BriggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Gomez v. ToledoSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Andreyko v. City of CincinnatiOhio Court of Appeals · 2003
- Thorp v. StrigariOhio Court of Appeals · 2003
- Asher Investments, Inc. v. City of CincinnatiOhio Court of Appeals · 1997
- Patton v. Wood County Humane SocietyOhio Court of Appeals · 2003
- Harvey v. Republic Services of Ohio II, 2007 Ca 00278 (3-23-2009)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2009
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.