James E. Duncan, Cross-Appellee v. Mr. & Mrs. Harold Peck, Cross-Appellants, Highland Coal & Chemical Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that private individual who seized property pursuant to unconstitutional state attachment statute was not protected by qualified immunity
• holding that private individual who seized property pursuant to unconstitutional state attachment statute was not protected by qualified immunity
• finding that private parties are not eligible for immunity from suit based on common law practices and policy rationales
• private party is governed only by self-interest and is not invested with public interest responsibilities
• parties “who rely on the advice of their attorneys, and invoke presumptively reasonable statutes” had a good faith defense
• “[A] private party is governed only by self-interest and is not invested with the responsibility of executing the duties of a public official in the public interest.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).