Christopher G. Pitt, Sr. And Tela Hansom-Pitt v. District of Columbia

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that in the criminal context, “the critical event triggering liability for malicious prosecution is the filing of an information”
• suggesting that a reasonable jury could conclude that an insufficient affidavit submitted to prosecutors could constitute malice for a malicious prosecution
• explaining that the “ultimate legal question of whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity” properly belongs to the judge, not the jury
• finding ten days in halfway house “seizure” for purposes of Section 1983 malicious-prosecution claims
• setting forth the elements of an IIED claim under District of Columbia law
• “Malicious prosecution is actionable under the Fourth Amendment to the extent that the defendant’s actions cause the plaintiff to be ‘seized’ without probable cause.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).