Jenkins v. Medford

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that when the complaint fails to show that the plaintiff has suffered a deprivation of a constitutional right, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal of the claim under Rule 12(b)(6)
• holding that because of North Carolina-specific laws deputy sheriffs in North Carolina are policymakers
• holding that when the complaint fails to show that the plaintiff has suffered a deprivation of a constitutional right, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal of the claim under Rule 12(b)(6)
• concluding that “in North Carolina, the office of deputy sheriff is that of a policymaker, and that deputy sheriffs are the alter ego of the sheriff generally, for whose conduct he is 28 liable” (emphasis added)
• instructing that “the district courts are to engage in a Stott-type analysis, examining the specific position at issue, as we have done here today”
• noting that “[i]f the position resembles a policymaker, a communicator, or a privy to confidential information, then loyalty to the sheriff is an important requirement for the job”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Jenkins v. Medford

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• Jenkins v. Medford
  Fourth Circuit· 1997-08-07· cited 1×
• Jenkins v. Medford
  Fourth Circuit· 1997-09-11
• Jenkins v. Medford
  Supreme Court· 1998-01-26