Stieve v. H.R.H. Construction

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that parts of an OSBI report could not be sealed when they were “highly relevant” to the litigation and had been “discussed elsewhere in unsealed ports of the record and even the parties’ briefs”
• concluding that at summary judgment stage a reasonable jury could find that county had policies or customs of “failing to medically train jail employees” where the record showed “multiple employees testified that they received no meaningful medical training”
• holding no qualified immunity available where Plaintiffs show “(1) a violation of a constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established”
• concluding detainee’s “ultimate harm of death was sufficiently serious for purposes of the objective component of deliberate indifference”
• concluding detainee’s “ultimate harm of death was sufficiently serious for 12 purposes of the objective component of deliberate indifference”
• noting that “violations of internal prison procedures ‘certainly provide circumstantial evidence that a prison health care gatekeeper knew of a substantial risk of serious harm’” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).