Grant v. City of Pittsburgh

How courts have described this case

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

• holding inquiry must focus on “whether a reasonable public official should know that his or her specific conduct violated clearly established rights.”
• explaining that district courts “should analyze separately the conduct of each [defendant] against the constitutional right allegedly violated” when assessing multiple defendants’ assertion of a qualified immunity defense
• explaining that district courts “should analyze separately the conduct of each [defendant] against the constitutional right allegedly violated” when assessing multiple defendants’ assertion of a qualified immunity defense
• deciding there was no merit to argument that party may not appeal denial of motion for summary judgment where motion raises same legal arguments as prior motion to dismiss that was not appealed
• deciding there was no merit to argument that party may not appeal denial of motion for summary judgment where motion raises same legal arguments as prior motion to dismiss that was not appealed
• finding that “in evaluating a defense of qualified immunity, an inquiry into the defendant’s state of mind is 4 Larsen v. Senate of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 154 F.3d 82, 94 (3d Cir. 1998

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).