Shields v. Pipes

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a plaintiff whose personal information was accessed and spread by local officers hadn’t suffered a Fourth Amendment injury because reputation isn’t a protected liberty interest
• holding that a state’s sovereign immunity doctrine is a matter of substantive law
• “Certainly, there is no question that an individual cannot expect to have a constitutionally protected privacy interest in matters of public record.”
• no private right of action provided by Nebraska criminal statutes relied up on by plaintiff

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).