S.U. v. Central Atlantic Legal Group, PLLC, dba Booth, Strange, & Daniel, and J.S.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that because of the influence of market forces on private employers qualified immunity did not extend to prison guards who were employed by a private, for-profit corporation that had contracted with the state to manage the prison
• “undertaking that task for profit and potentially in competition with other firms”
• explaining that § 1983 immunities extend only to state actors
• private prison guards, unlike those who work directly for the government, do not enjoy immunity from suit in a § 1983 case
• “[W]e have answered the immunity question narrowly, in the context in which it arose”
• private company prison guards not entitled to qualified immunity defense in § 1983 case

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).