Deville v. Marcantel

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “substantially lower” amount of force was justified where a suspect “was stopped for a minor traffic violation . . . than if she had been suspected of a serious crime”
• concluding that injury from handcuffs applied so tightly that Plaintiff had nerve damage requiring four surgeries was not de minimis
• holding that applying handcuffs too tightly constituted excessive force where there was evidence that it caused long-term nerve damage that was severe enough to require four surgeries
• holding that “[i]f there was probable cause for any of the charges made . . . then the arrest was supported by probable cause, and the claim for false arrest fails.”
• holding that injuries were not de minimis where plaintiff provided evidence that “handcuffs were applied so tightly as to cause long-term nerve damage that was severe enough to require four surgeries”
• explaining that “courts may look to the seriousness of injury to determine whether the use of force could plausibly have been thought necessary”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).