Seifert v. Unified Government

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that reserve sheriffs deputy’s “testimony [in civil rights action] was protected speech,” because “[i]t concerned his work but was not part of it.”
• “Only individuals, not governmental entities, can assert qualified immunity.” (citing Beedle v. Wilson, 422 F.3d 1059, 1069 (10th Cir. 2005)
• internal quotation marks Page 6 Appellate Case: 23-1084 Document: 010111075551 Date Filed: 07/05/2024 Page: 7 omitted
• “[I]ssues adverted to in a perfunctory manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation, are deemed waived.” (alteration in original) (citation omitted)
• testimony of police officer against fellow officers in a civil-rights lawsuit was protected because it “concerned his work but was not part of it”
• “[I]ssues adverted to in a perfunctory manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation, are deemed waived.” (alteration in original) (quoting Murrell v. Shalala, 43 F.3d 1388, 1389 n.2 (10th Cir. 1994))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).