Satele v. California

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “for a warrant to meet the particularity requirement, it must identify the alleged crime for which evidence is sought”
• noting that security concerns in prisons warrant some restriction on communications between inmates and “free persons,” including attorneys
• explaining that “a court may not draw negative inferences against a nonmoving party on a summary judgment motion”
• concluding the district court procedurally erred by sua sponte granting summary judgment for the moving party based on a ground not raised by the moving party and without giving any notice to the non-moving party
• explaining that “controlling Supreme Court and Second Circuit case law sets forth the principle that a non-moving party must have some evidence permitting a reasonable juror to find in its favor with respect to an affirmative defense”
• describing the requirements for a criminal search warrant’s incorporation of an affidavit by reference

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).