Fields v. Prater

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that supervisory responsibilities alone do not permit application of Elrod-Branti exception
• noting that “[o]fficials are not liable for bad guesses in gray areas; they are liable for transgressing bright lines”
• “examining the duties and responsibilities of a local director [for county social services department] under Virginia law,” and noting that “‘courts focus on the powers inherent in a given office’”
• qualified immunity protects defendants from being “retroactively subject to significant penalties at law for which they did not have proper notice”
• qualified immunity protects defendants from being “retroactively subject to significant penalties at law for which they did not have proper notice”
• “Under state law and regulations adopted by the State Board, all DSS employees are to be hired on the basis of merit . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).