Legal Opinion
Baranski v. Fifteen Unknown Agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided March 14, 2005No. 03-5582/5614PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CLAY, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiffs Keith B. Baranski and Pars International Corporation (“Pars”) appeal the March 14, 2003 order of the district court holding that Defendants Fifteen Unknown Agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (“ATF”) and six named ATF agents were entitled to qualified immunity because (1) Plaintiffs suffered no Fourth Amendment violation by virtue of the alleged lack of particularity in the search warrant that Defendants used to seize hundreds of firearms and accessories owned by Baranski and stored by Pars; and (2) the facts did not show that Defendants…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Heck v. HumphreySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Malley v. BriggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Gibson v. Superintendent Of New Jersey Department Of Law And Public Safety-Division Of State PoliceCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
- Baranski v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2008
- Baranski v. Fifteen Unknown Agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and FirearmsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2006
- Keith B. Baranski v. Fifteen Unknown Agents Of The Bureau Of Alcohol, Tobacco And FirearmsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
- Gibson v. NJ Dept Law & PubCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.