Mark Cook v. Roberta Sheldon and Nelson Saldana, New York State Troopers

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that officers commenced criminal proceedings against a plaintiff where they formally charged him with violating a statute and had him arraigned before a judge
• recognizing a § 1983 abuse of process claim only for abuse of criminal process—not civil process
• holding that a claim for abuse of process requires a plaintiff to show that the defendants acted “with intent to do harm without excuse or justification, ... in order to obtain a collateral objective that is outside the legitimate ends of the process”
• holding that a claim for abuse of process requires a plaintiff to show that the defendants acted “with intent to do harm without excuse or justification, ... in order to obtain a collateral objective that is outside the legitimate ends of the process”
• declaring, in 1994, that, “[i]n the criminal context, malicious abuse of process is ‘by definition a denial of due process’ ”
• stating that having plaintiff arraigned amounted to legal process

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).