Ortiz v. Newyork

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that an analogous case need not be on point “on all fours with the defendant of- ficer’s misconduct” (citation modified)
• explaining that an analogous case need not be on point “on all fours with the defendant of- ficer’s misconduct” (citation modified)
• holding that officer’s use of handcuffs to restrain the plaintiff for about 30 minutes did not violate the Fourth Amendment, even though it aggravated a pre-existing shoulder condition, because the plaintiff never told the officer of his pre- existing condition or complained of pain
• noting that the court does not allow a party to contradict deposition testimony with later-filed contradictory affidavits in order to create “sham issues of fact with affida- vits that contradict their prior depositions.”
• noting that the court does not allow a party to contradict deposition testimony with later-filed contradictory affidavits in order to create “sham issues of fact with affida- vits that contradict their prior depositions.”
• plaintiff is not required to “point to a case on all fours with the defendant officer’s misconduct”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).