Ahmmad Pourghoraishi v. Flying J, Incorporated, Steve Lindgren, Larry Williams, City of Gary, Indiana, Nakon Security, Incorporated

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that affidavit statements that contradict the party's deposition testimony must be disregarded since the party “has not asserted that either of the[ ] [exceptions] applies to his deposition testimony”
• reiterating that “the doctrine of qualified im- munity leaves ample room for mistaken judgments by police officers” (citations and quotation marks omitted)
• noting that “many groups whom we would now label ‘white’ – Germans, Greeks, Swedes, Hungarians, Finns etc. – were, at the time Congress adopted § 1981, considered distinct races”
• explaining that, although § 1981 is often invoked in the context of employment discrimination, courts also \evaluat[e] § 1981 claims made by plaintiffs who allege that they faced illegal discrimination in retail establishments\
• explaining that an officer did not have probable cause to arrest where the individual “did not raise his voice, use pro- fanity, make unreasonable noise, or otherwise engage in any behaviors prohibited by the disorderly conduct statute”
• rejecting argument that Section 1981 claim based on “Iranian ancestry” is impermissibly based on national origin

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).