Dale Kerbyson v. Elba Township

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that pattern of lawful shootings by MPD officers of dogs did not place District on notice as to risk of unconstitutional canine killings
• holding that homeowner’s uncorroborated depo- sition testimony created an issue of fact as to the circumstances sur- rounding the shooting of the family’s dog: “Corroboration goes to credibility, a question for the jury, not the court.”
• finding that the district court erred in holding that the dog owner's uncorroborated testimony failed to create a genuine dispute of material fact
• noting that the district court relied on dog’s history of aggression in discrediting plaintiff’s testimony that the dog was not behaving aggressively but holding that granting summary judgment against plaintiff on that basis was improper
• explaining that a plaintiff’s testimony that is “contradicted by multiple disinterested witnesses” and “by the plaintiff herself” can be excluded from consideration on summary judgment, because the testimony is “so undermined as to be incredible”
• highlighting the importance of separating “jury functions” from the “district court’s role as the arbiter of legal questions” in considering summary judgement motions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).