No. 18-150
Phil Plummer, et al. v. David M. Hopper, Special Administrator of the Estate of Robert Andrew Richardson, Sr.
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2)
Tags: 14th-amendment civil-rights clearly-established-right deliberate-indifference detainee-rights due-process excessive-force fourteenth-amendment law-enforcement medical-intervention qualified-immunity
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity DueProcess FourthAmendment Punishment JusticiabilityDoctri
SocialSecurity DueProcess FourthAmendment Punishment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2018-11-16
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether the Sixth Circuit defined the constitutional rights in question at too high a level of generality contrary to this Court's teachings on qualified immunity?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Sixth Circuit defined the constitutional rights in question at too high a level of generality contrary to this Court's teachings on qualified immunity?
Docket Entries
2018-11-19
Petition DENIED.
2018-10-31
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/16/2018.
2018-10-12
Brief of respondent David Hopper, Special Administrator of the Estate of Robert A. Richardson, Sr. in opposition filed.
2018-09-19
Response Requested. (Due October 19, 2018)
2018-09-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/5/2018.
2018-09-05
Waiver of right of respondent David Hopper, Special Administrator of the Estate of Robert A. Richardson, Sr. et al. to respond filed.
2018-07-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 4, 2018)
Attorneys
David Hopper, Special Administrator of the Estate of Robert A. Richardson, Sr.
Nicholas Anthony DiCello — Spangenberg, Shibley & Liber LLP, Respondent
Phil Plummer, et al.
John J. Hare — Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman and Goggin, Petitioner