O'NEIL v. City of Iowa City, Iowa

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that summary judgment is proper when “no reasonable jury could believe” the non-moving party’s view of the facts
• observing that summary judgment is proper when “no reasonable jury could believe” the non-moving party’s view of the facts
• remanding when the district court provided only “a truncated analysis” that contained “absolutely no discussion” of the clearly established prong
• remanding for a more detailed consideration of a denial of summary judgment based on, at most, an analysis of only one step of the qualified-immunity inquiry
• “We remand the case to the district court for a more detailed consideration and explanation of the validity, or not, of the defendants’ claim to qualified immunity.”
• “In deciding a motion for summary judgment, ‘courts are required to view the facts and draw reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the party opposing the [summary judgment] motion.’” (quoting Scott, 127 S. Ct. at 1774) (alteration in original)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).