Lunsford v. Hatfield Coal Co.

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 did not violate the Fourth 16 Amendment by entering onto “farm property” by removing locked gate and driving past “No Trespassing” signs
• denying summary judgment where a reasonable jury could conclude that if the observing officer “was close enough” to help handcuff and move the plaintiff, “he was close enough to at least block” the excessive force, “even if the entire event took only seconds”
• “[Plaintiff] pleaded guilty to underage drinking and received judicial diversion. It appears to the Court that he cannot now claim that he was unlawfully arrested for that crime under the Fourth Amendment.”
• addressing entry into wooded area that was an “open field”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).