Drummond v. Castro

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an excessive force claim requires a “serious or harmful” use of force
• noting that prosecutors’ “failure to seek a grand jury indictment does not serve as evidence against a finding that probable cause existed to arrest and prosecute” a plaintiff
• stating that a “defendant police officer who arrests a person without a warrant is not liable for false arrest if the officer had [probable cause] to believe that the individual committed an offense”
• \[T]he presence of probable cause is a complete defense to an action for malicious prosecution under § 1983 or state law.\
• where probable cause for arrest existed, the malicious prosecution claims failed, because the defendants were not made aware of any post-arrest intervening facts that would negate probable cause
• “Courts have repeatedly found that there is a presumption of probable cause to arrest [and subsequently prosecute] when police are acting on the testimony of a putative victim or eyewitness.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).