Lobon v. Government of the Canal Zone

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that officers were entitled to qualified immunity because the right they allegedly violated was not clearly established
• plaintiffs maintain that despite federal law, decisions of state courts demonstrate law was clearly established; they cite particular case, which court finds did not adjudicate right at issue
• “If the controlling law is not clearly established, a reasonable person would not be expected to know how to structure his conduct in order to avoid liability”
• “The plaintiff bears the 28 burden of proof that the right allegedly violated was clearly established at the time of the - 21 - Case 2:18-cv-01743-DWL Document 184 Filed 08/25/21 Page 22 of 58 1 alleged misconduct.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).