7 results for 'cat:"Civil Rights" AND cat:"First Amendment" AND cat:"Police Misconduct"'.
J. King finds in favor of the city against the protester's complaint that several of the city's unnamed officers used unreasonable force against her during a Seattle protest against George Floyd's murder on the night of June 7, 2020. The protester's First Amendment claim fails because he was not protesting or filming for journalistic purposes, he violated dispersal orders, and he does not produce any evidence that the police retaliated against him or the crowed for protected activities.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: King, Filed On: April 24, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv1343, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, first Amendment, police Misconduct
J. Schiltz partially grants the law enforcement officers' motion for summary judgment in the Los Angeles Times journalists' suit alleging that they were unconstitutionally targeted by police while covering civil unrest following the murder of George Floyd in 2020. Claims stemming from an incident in which a tear gas canister struck one of the journalists' legs are dismissed, since the journalists have not produced evidence that any of the named defendants were responsible for the canister. A failure-to-intervene claim is voluntarily dismissed as to one of the officers, but survives as to the others. Supervisory-liability claims are also dismissed, but all other claims survive.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Schiltz, Filed On: January 29, 2024, Case #: 0:21cv1282, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, first Amendment, police Misconduct
J. Flanagan grants a police officer and a county sheriff’s office’s motion for judgment on the pleadings following allegations of First and 14th Amendments violations brought by a man whom the officer arrested. The man claims the officer did not have good cause to arrest nor imprison him as he was not carrying a firearm. However, he failed to include allegations in support of his claim that the sheriff’s office — which itself is an entity not capable of being sued — fundamentally had something to do with the officer’s alleged maltreatment of him. His claims are dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Flanagan, Filed On: November 15, 2023, Case #: 7:23cv9, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, first Amendment, police Misconduct
J. D’Agostino grants summary judgment in favor of two village police officers on a GrubHub delivery driver’s civil rights claims stemming from a traffic stop. The driver was ultimately convicted on the traffic violations, so probable cause was established for the traffic stop. The officers were also justified in using force to remove him from his car and arrest him after he failed to comply with the officers’ demands to show his hands and exit his vehicle and instead reached into the passenger side. The court also rejected the driver’s First Amendment right to freedom of religion claim, as he fails to argue the traffic stop and subsequent arrest violated his religious rights by preventing him from delivering a customer’s food order.
Court: USDC Northern District of New York, Judge: D’Agostino, Filed On: November 14, 2023, Case #: 5:22cv1088, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, first Amendment, police Misconduct
J. Wright partially denies the sheriff's motion for summary judgment in a civil rights action brought by the journalists alleging that they were harassed, shot with less-lethal weapons and unfairly arrested during the law enforcement response to protests after the deaths of George Floyd and Daunte Wright. The sheriff's motion is granted as to the journalists' injunctive and declaratory relief claims. However, the sheriff is entitled to qualified immunity as to three journalists' civil rights claims against him in his individual capacity. The city's motion for summary judgment is denied because the journalists presented evidence of a persistent pattern of unconstitutional misconduct by the police department and deliberate indifference by the city. The evidence shows that officers "deliberately and systematically" targeted journalists who were identifiable as members of the press and were not committing crimes. There is also evidence supporting the inference of a conspiracy between the police department, state patrol and other agencies to disregard curfew exemptions and interfere with the freedom of the press.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Wright, Filed On: September 26, 2023, Case #: 0:20cv1302, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, first Amendment, police Misconduct
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. McCafferty partially grants the government officials' joint motion for judgment as to a lawsuit brought by a woman alleging that she was wrongfully arrested for trespassing as retaliation for her criticism of city acts and officials. The woman fails to show that her free speech was chilled or that the disputes with her over Right-to-Know laws are adverse actions taken against her. However, her claim that her arrest was in retaliation for her protected activity withstands the officials' motion.
Court: USDC New Hampshire, Judge: McCafferty, Filed On: September 26, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv326, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, first Amendment, police Misconduct
J. Hamilton partially grants the police officers and city officials' motion for summary judgment in the protestors' suit alleging civil rights violations and injuries at protests of the death of George Floyd. Police officers' decision to shoot less-lethal munitions into a crowd could create unlawful-seizure claims for those struck, since firing their weapons toward the protesters was a "knowing and willful act that terminated [their] freedom of movement," regardless of the officers' intent to encourage protestors to disperse. Several protestors' claims are dismissed for reasons including inability to identify or incorrect identification of the officers who injured them and the officers' reasonable beliefs that the use of force was necessary to apprehend them. Five protestors have surviving claims.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Hamilton, Filed On: August 3, 2023, Case #: 4:21cv1705, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, first Amendment, police Misconduct