Joseph Deas, Jr. v. Attorney Jack Potts

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 private attorney retained to represent a criminal defendant did not act under color of state law
• holding that a “private attorney who is retained to represent a criminal defendant is not acting under color of state law, and therefore is not amenable to suit under § 1983”
• holding that a “private attorney who is retained to represent a criminal defendant is not acting under color of state law, and therefore is not amenable to suit under § 1983”
• finding that private attorney does not act under color of state law
• finding private attorney does not act under color of state law
• “A private attorney who is retained to represent a criminal defendant is not acting under color of state law, and therefore is not amenable to suit under § 1983.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).