Brandon Thrasher v. Amarillo Police Dept

How courts have described this case

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

• discussing that the parties litigated, and the district court was able to determine, the applicable statute of limitations
• reasoning that “[p]roof of good cause requires at least as much as would be required to show excusable neglect” (internal quotation marks and alteration omitted)
• noting that a court has discretion to extend the time for service even in the absence of good cause
• holding that a district court’s dismissal under Rule 4(m) requires “a clear record of delay or contumacious conduct by the plaintiff” when the statute of limitations would bar future litigation (quoting Millan v. USAA Gen. Indem. Co., 546 F.3d 321, 326 (5th Cir. 2008))
• holding that a district court’s dismissal under Rule 4(m) requires “a clear record of delay or contumacious conduct by the plaintiff’ when the statute of limitations would bar future litigation (quoting Millan v. USAA Gen. Indem. Co., 546 F.3d 321, 326 (Sth Cir. 2008))
• applying heightened standard of review to dismissal without prejudice when statute of limitations likely bars future litigation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).