Ference v. Township of Hamilton

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that some physical contact alone by police during arrest was insufficient to show excessive force because “[wlere it otherwise, police officers might have to rely on verbal instructions alone to effect an arrest for fear of [S]ection 1983 liability”
• observing that the police officer was managing a volatile situation involving several individuals, thus adding “urgency” to the situation
• “construing the evidence in the light most favorable to the [p]laintiff, a reasonable jury could find that [an officer] shoving [p]laintiff against the door head first and painfully twisting his arms amounted to excessive force.”
• “The videotape is also likely the best available evidence of the events at issue in this case. Thus, the videotape will be considered as part of the record.”
• “The videotape is also likely the best available evidence of the events at issue in this case. Thus, the videotape will be considered as part of the record.”
• “To establish [an abuse of process] claim, there must be some proof of a definite act or threat not authorized by the process, or aimed at an objective not legitimate in the use of the process.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).