Legal Opinion
Magrum v. Meinke
District Court, N.D. Ohio
Decided August 27, 2004No. 3:03CV7306PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
KATZ, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 40) as to which Plaintiff has filed an opposition (Doc. No. 44) and Defendant has filed a reply (Doc. No. 49). The Court has jurisdiction to consider this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 1367. For the reasons stated below, Defendant’s motion will be denied.
BACKGROUND
This case arises out of a routine traffic stop that escalated into much more. The parties’ versions of events, on which resolution of Defendant’s motion depends, substantially diverge. As a…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Graham v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Jackson v. TelladoDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2017
- Ward v. County of CuyahogaDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2010
- Root v. LoucksDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2021
- United States v. Dick NoelCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2009
- United States v. Dick NoelCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2009
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.