Daniels v. Woodside

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the superintendent exercised discretion to admit students
• explaining that the superintendent exercised discretion to admit students
• finding no Fifth, Eighth or Fourteenth Amendment violation where “the deprivations imposed . . . were affirmative steps to secure [the detainee’s] well-being, in furtherance of the jail staff’s legitimate and non-punitive purpose of preventing [his] suicide or injury”
• “A mere scintilla of evidence is insufficient; there must be evidence on which the jury could reasonably find for the nonmovant.”
• “Entry of summary judgment is appropriate against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish an element essential to that party’s case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial.”
• “Entry of summary judgment is appropriate against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish an element essential to that party’s case, and on which 3Magistrate Judge Grand allowed some discovery to occur after this date (i.e. the parties’ depositions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).