Viilo v. Eyre

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the unreasonable killing of a companion dog constitutes a seizure under the Fourth Amendment
• holding that a police officer is on notice that unnecessarily killing a person’s pet offends the Fourth Amendment
• stating that “common sense . . . counsel[s] that the use of deadly force against a household pet is reasonable only if the pet poses an immediate danger and the use of force is unavoidable”
• dismissing appeal from denial of qualified immunity against officers who shot dog that emerged from behind owner’s house and approached officers
• declining to enter summary judgment for' defendants where several witnesses on both sides “vigorously contested” whether the dog posed an imminent threat
• “[R]ulings remain appealable where the defendant appeals the denial of qualified immunity on the basis of stipulated facts, on the facts as alleged by the plaintiffs or on the facts the district court deems sufficiently supported to create jury issues.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).