Sweatt v. Bailey

How courts have described this case

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

• applying Hill to § 1983 retaliation claim by a prisoner who claimed he was beaten while in detention for calling an officer an “ass”
• analyzing whether “controlling persons after arrest” was within a police officer’s duties at the discretionary authority stage and concluding that allegations of using unnecessary force were “more properly considered in the second step of the [qualified immunity] test”
• district court applied Fourth Amendment to arrestee who claimed excessive use of force when officer beat him while he was talking on the telephone
• “[P]olice officers must perform the duty of controlling persons after arrest ... This is not to condone the use of profanity and unnecessary force. However, these alleged acts are more properly considered in the second step of the test ...”
• “[Pjolice officers must perform the duty of controlling persons after arrest ... This is not to condone the use of profanity and unnecessary force. However, these alleged acts are more properly considered in the second step of the test ...”
• “malicious and summarily punitive infliction of harm transgressed clear constitutional bounds — indeed, bounds so broadly recognized and accepted as to have been incorporated into most of the primary constitutional provisions constraining the conduct of law enforcement officials”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).