Suboh v. District Attorney's Office

How courts have described this case

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

• reasoning that “[w]hatever the exact contours of the right [in question], this case falls well within the area of clarity”
• finding that a constitutional right was clearly established even though the court was unable to find a case “exactly on all fours” with the facts of the case before it
• holding that “[a]rticulating the right as one of ‘familial integrity’ casts too broad a net. The inquiry into whether a right is clearly established ‘must be undertaken in light of the specific context of the case, not as a broad general proposition’ ”
• applying a fact-based balancing test to determine the viability of alleged infringements of the right to “familial integrity,” protected by the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, in a child-custody dispute
• collecting cases supporting proposition that a child has a “liberty interest in being in the care and custody of her parents”
• second prong does not require that there have been another case “exactly on all fours with the facts of this case”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).