Amicus in Support of Petitioner. Strip searching a person arrested on a warrant issued for failure to pay a fine is unreasonable. The Court should recognize the differences between temporary detainees and those properly assigned to the general jail population.
Amicus in Support of Petitioner. The Supreme Court should reverse the Fifth Circuit decision which expanded the Federal Tort Claims Act's discretionary function exception.
Due process requires a prompt post-seizure hearing to determine the validity of seizures under DAFPA to guarantee meanigful oversight of Illinois police agencies.
The Supreme Court should not adopt Petitioners’ position that a heightened pleading standard applies to plaintiffs seeking to hold accountable “high-ranking” officials.
Whistle Blower Protection: Does a refusal to commit the crimes of Offering a False Instrument for Filing in the First and Second Degrees (N.Y. Penal L. §§ 175.35; 175.30) represent speech made pursuant to his official duties within the meaning of Garcetti v. Ceballos, 574 U.S. 410 (2006), and Weintraub v. Board of Educ., 593 F. 3d 196 (2d Cir. 2010)
The failure to provide exculpatory evidence to a person charged with a crime violates that individual’s rights to procedural due process of law. Whether a failure to provide exculpatory evidence to a criminal defendant in a given situation violates procedural due process must be determined by the balancing test of Mathews v. Eldridge.
The Court should affirm the denial of qualified immunity in both Brooks and Mattos, and remand the cases for trials on their merits so the respective finders of fact can determine whether the defendants’ use of ECDs were objectively reasonable under the circumstances.
The award of fees in this case serves both congressional intent and California public policy to encourage competent attorneys to litigate civil rights cases, as a deterrent to future violations of the law especially when the damages are small.
Plaintiffs evidence is sufficient to show reasonableness of fees; the trial court's order is sufficient to support the fee award and permit appellate review.
