Williams v. Rodriguez

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a city could be liable for the acts of a police officer who was no longer a named defendant
• holding that an arrested plaintiff who said to a police-officer defendant that he had asthma, “can’t breathe,” and “needed [his] medication,” but did not “exhibit[ ] physical symptoms reflective of an asthma attack,” did not demonstrate a serious medical condition
• explaining that failure to identify unknown defendant during discovery and consequential failure to serve that defendant with process requires dismissal
• concluding, in deliberate-indifference action, that liability for willful and wanton conduct is derivative of federal liability
• stating that dismissal is proper where plaintiff failed to identify and serve unnamed defendant before close of discovery
• noting that claims challenging the conditions of confinement brought by “pretrial detainees ... who have not yet had a judicial determination of probable cause (a Gerstein hearing), are instead governed by the Fourth Amendment”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).