Mariani v. Foley

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that counsel’s unverified memorandum opposing the motion for summary judgment did not comply with the affidavit requirement in Rule 56(d)
• concluding that the legality of the condition imposed by the owners of a parking lot prohibiting protestors to come onto the lot was “not readily discernable to a police officer making arrests or city official formulating a policy to enforce private trespass rights”
• noting that the standard for defeating a qualified immunity defense for a Fourth Amendment section 1983 claim is that no reasonable competent police officer would have concluded that probable cause existed
• noting that “Rule 56(f) clearly requires that an affidavit be filed.”
• applying and construing the former Rule 56(f) which is substantially the same as the current Rule 56(d)
• noting that an unsworn memorandum is not an affidavit

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).