Michael Alexander v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• indicating that \public corruption\ is \hardly unknown\ and \egregious abuse of one's official position\ is not \unthinkable\
• explaining that under Indiana law a malicious-prosecution claim can be made against a defendant who did not himself initiate the prosecution when the prosecution is initiated solely based on information provided by the defendant
• explaining that under Indiana law a malicious‐prosecution claim can be made against a defend‐ ant who did not himself initiate the prosecution when the prosecution is initiated solely based on information provid‐ ed by the defendant
• noting that federal claim‐accrual rules, including the continuing‐violation doctrine, apply in FTCA suits
• noting that federal claim‐accrual rules, including the continuing‐violation doctrine, apply in FTCA suits
• “Knowingly false statements by the affiant cannot support a finding of probable cause, and as we read the complaint, that is all there was.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).