Legal Opinion

Bowling v. Rector

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided October 26, 2009No. 07-6284PublishedCited by 49 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

EBEL, Circuit Judge.

In this interlocutory appeal, Joe Rector challenges the district court’s denial of his motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. Danny Bowling sued Rector and eight other defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that they violated his constitutional right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure when Rector applied for and received a warrant to search Bowling’s house and then executed that warrant. 1 Because we conclude that Rector was entitled to qualified immunity from liability for one of Bowling’s claims under § 1983, we AFFIRM IN PART, REVERSE…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Pearson v. CallahanSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  3. Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. Mitchell v. ForsythSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  5. Brinegar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1949

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

3Cited by49 opinions

  1. Dodds v. RichardsonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2010
  2. Estate of Marvin L. Booker v. GomezCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2014
  3. Koch v. City of Del CityCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2011
  4. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. C.R. England, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2011
  5. Mink v. KnoxCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2010

44 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