Antoine Jones v. Steve Kirchner

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that officers exceeded the authorization of the warrant by executing the search warrant at the defendant’s home at 4:45 a.m. when the warrant expressly stated that a search was not to occur before 6:00 a.m.
• clarifying that the court was not holding that “neither of two alternative bases for a holding can estop a party from re-litigating an issue in a future action”
• arguing the office environment and com- munication between FEMA’s leadership indicates Hubbard was aware of Harris’ EEO activities
• applying the statute of limitations imposed by District of Columbia law to a § 1983 claim brought in the District of Columbia even though the alleged constitutional tort occurred in Maryland
• affirming dismissal of a complaint on qualified-im- munity grounds when the plaintiff had not shown that the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the purported violation
• applying D.C. statute of limitations in a Section 1983 action brought here

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).