Garcia-Diaz v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that law could be clearly established where decisions of “other circuits and . . . our own Court foreshadowed the right”
• holding that even if the legal frameworks and standards applicable in two proceedings are not identical, the factual findings supporting the first judgment are given preclusive effect
• holding that, prior to Matusick and in the qualified immunity context, whether relationships other than marriages were constitutionally protected was not clearly established and, thus, that the government employer was entitled to qualified immunity
• concluding that an administrative law judge’s legal conclusions did not preclude a discrimination claim because the conclusions “were guided by the particular legal framework and standards applicable” to the administrative hearings
• concluding that administrative law judgeʹs legal conclusions had no preclusive effect on discrimination claim because the ALJʹs conclusions ʺwere guided by the particular legal framework and standards applicableʺ to the administrative hearings
• concluding that the district court should have given preclusive effect to certain factual findings from the prior proceeding notwithstanding that those findings did not, without more, resolve an ultimate issue at trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).