Skip to main content
· 3/24/1997

John ROE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO; Donna Lee; Arlo Smith, Defendants-Appellees

Citations

  • 109 F.3d 578
  • 97 Daily Journal DAR 3848
  • 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2087
  • 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 5422
  • 1997 WL 129025

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 prosecutor's decision not to call a witness at trial was protected by absolute immunity
  • holding that a prosecutor’s decision not to call a witness at trial was protected by absolute immunity
  • holding that a prosecutor’s decision not to call a wit- ness at trial was protected by absolute immunity
  • holding that “a prosecutor is entitled to absolute immunity for the decision not to prosecute”
  • holding that prosecutors were entitled to absolute immunity for deciding not to prosecute an officer’s cases
  • holding that speech by public employees about personnel disputes and grievances is not a matter of public concern

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Leavy, Sneed, Thomas

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.