Terry Donovan v. Timothy Thames and Patrick Collura

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that conviction for resisting arrest did not preclude the bringing of a § 1983 action for excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment
• applying Kentucky law on issue preclusion and concluding that the trial court’s determination that the officers had probable cause to arrest plaintiff was essential to the trial court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion to suppress and his conviction
• arrestee was collaterally estopped from bringing § 1983 action for false arrest when state trial court already had determined that the arrest was valid under state law because the police officers had probable cause
• “Under Kentucky law, res judicata, or taking under Kentucky law. See Commonwealth v. Stearns claim preclusion, may be used to preclude entire claims that Coal and Lumber Co., 678 S.W.2d 378, 381 (Ky. 1984
• “issues actually litigated in a state-court proceeding are entitled to preclusive effect in a subsequent federal § 1983 suit to the extent provided by the law of preclusion in the state where the judgment was rendered”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).