Srinivasa Musunuru v. Loretta E. Lynch

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that such general principles were insufficient to support a conclusion that handcuffing a school child violated clearly established law as of 2015
• holding that handcuffing a ten-year-old girl while at school was excessive force
• holding an officer was not grossly negligent, though his actions towards a ten-year-old arrestee were “callous” an amounted to an excessive use of force
• noting that it is “prudent to consider [] the suspect’s age and the school context”
• suggesting that “the typical arrest of . . . a teenager” is more like “the typical arrest of an adult” than an arrest of a child
• finding that the first Graham factor weighs against plaintiff with respect to the crime of assault but that the “finding is tempered…by the fact that the offense is a misdemeanor”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).