Martinique Stoudemire v. Mich. Dep't of Corrections

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “the state of the law in existence at the time of the strip search . . . was clearly established”
• holding that “the state of the law in existence at the time of the strip search ... was clearly established”
• finding that “no emergency made such a search necessary.... [because] there were no time or resource constraints that supported the need for such a[] [public] search”
• finding that “no emergency made such a search necessary . . . . [because] there were no time or resource constraints that supported the need for such a[] [public] search”
• explaining that, outside the obvious case, a plaintiff on summary judgment must show “failure to adhere to a particularized body of precedent that squarely governs the case here” (citation omitted)
• noting that “suspicionless strip searches [are] permissible as a matter of constitutional law”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).