No. 18-695
Christopher Chung, et al. v. Gulstan E. Silva, Jr., as Personal Representative of the Estate of Sheldon Paul Haleck, et al.
Amici (1)
Tags: civil-rights clearly-established-law community-caretaking due-process excessive-force law-enforcement ninth-circuit qualified-immunity reasonableness use-of-force
Latest Conference:
2019-02-15
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in denying the officers qualified immunity by defining clearly established law at too high a level of generality rather than considering the particular facts and circumstances of this case.
2. Whether the Ninth Circuit, having found that the officers were exercising a community caretaking function, erred by only considering the reasonableness of their caretaking while disregarding the requirement of clearly established law.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in denying the officers qualified immunity
Docket Entries
2019-02-19
Petition DENIED.
2019-01-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
2019-01-15
Reply of petitioners Christopher Chung, et al. filed.
2018-12-27
Brief amici curiae of National Association of Police Organizations, et al. filed.
2018-12-27
Brief of respondents Gulstan E. Silva, Jr., et al. in opposition filed.
2018-12-13
Blanket Consent filed by Petitioners, Christopher Chung, et al.
2018-11-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 27, 2018)
Attorneys
Christopher Chung, et al.
Gulstan E. Silva, Jr., et al.
Eric A Seitz — Law Offices of Eric A. Seitz, Respondent
International Municipal Lawyers Association, Inc.
Mary Elisabeth Naumann — Jackson Kelly PLLC, Amicus