Parenteau 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.

• finding that private doctor “hired to do a job for which a permanent government employee would have received qualified immunity” was entitled to assert qualified immunity defense
• finding “the purposes of qualified immunity support its application here: carrying out criminal penalties is unquestionably a traditional function of government”
• declining to take judicial notice of newspaper article for truth of matter asserted
• “Judicial notice is proper when a fact is beyond debate, for instance, what time the sun sets on a given day.”
• private physician engaged by a prison to administer an execution could assert qualified immunity
• “[C]ourts may take judicial notice of a fact ‘that is not subject to reasonable dispute because it . . . can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).