Hinton v. City Of Elwood

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a city may not be held liable under 1983 \where there was no underlying constitutional violation by any of its officers.\
• holding that a governmental entity is not liable under § 1983 when there has been no underlying constitutional violation by an employee
• holding that the absence of a constitutional violation by city officers “precludes the imposition of any liability against” a city itself through a Monell claim
• holding that the absence of a constitutional violation by city officers “precludes the imposition of any liability against” a city itself through a Monell claim
• recognizing that “[a] municipality may not be held liable where there was no underlying constitutional violation by any of its officers”
• holding that “[t]he Slinkards have not established that Principal Benson [or Superin- tendent Gist] violated their constitutional rights” (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).