Hale v. Beard

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “[i]t is clearly established that officers may not use a taser against a compliant or non-threatening suspect”
• noting that an officer is entitled to qualified immunity if “‘any reasonable officer, out of the wide range of reasonable people who enforce the laws in this country, could have determined that the challenged action was lawful’”
• upholding qualified immunity award, where police officer tased twelve-year old deaf student whom he reasonably believed was disobeying his orders
• “It is clearly established that officers may not use a taser against a compliant or non-threatening suspect.”
• “It is clearly established that officers may not use a taser against a compliant or non-threatening suspect.” (internal citation omitted)
• “It is clearly established that officers may not use a taser against a compliant or non-threatening suspect.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).