Paul v. Village of Quogue

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that we review determinations of a government’s inability or unwillingness to respond for only substantial evidence
• concluding no acquiescence when the government (i) investigates police reports, even if an applicant saw no action on the police report, or (ii) is otherwise ineffective
• “[A]s a matter of law, the Honduran government’s likely response to future reports of crime – taking a report and commencing an investigation – does not constitute acquiescence.”
• ‘‘[d]ismissal [of appeal] under the fugitive disentitlement doctrine remains discretionary’’
• “[I]f a government is willing and able to afford some protection to an individual against harms inflicted by private actors, then that government is not sufficiently complicit in the private conduct for those acts to constitute persecution for purposes of relief from removal.”
• collecting cases concluding “these standards are functionally identical”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).