Hrdina 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.

• concluding that the defendant was entitled to qualified immunity because, inter alia, the plaintiff raised his hands without having been told to do so (according to the plaintiff, he did so in order to be handcuffed
• explaining that we judge the reasonableness of force from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene
• pushing handcuffed individual against a wall, although unnecessary, was not plainly unlawful, and officer entitled to qualified immunity because \it was not clearly established that the amount of force he used . . . was unlawful.\
• not excessive force to arrest plaintiff for building code violation by pushing him up against wall and applying chokehold to unresisting plaintiff while affixing handcuffs
• “When an officer asserts qualified immunity, the issue is not whether probable cause existed in fact, but whether the officer had ‘arguable’ probable cause to arrest.”
• plaintiff cannot rely on \general conclusory allegations\ or \broad legal truisms\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).