No. 20-1696
Jeriel Edwards v. Steven Harmon, et al.
Response Waived
Experienced Counsel
Tags: bodycam-evidence bodycam-video civil-rights civil-rights
20-1695" civil-rights-litigation de-novo-standard excessive-force fifth-circuit-review frcp-60b4-motion inherent-court-powers jurisdictional-requirements qualified-immunity rule-54-attorney-fees section-1983 summary-judgment Whether the Fifth Circuit can refuse to review the
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity JusticiabilityDoctri
SocialSecurity JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2021-09-27
Question Presented (from Petition)
Does Scott v. Harris alter, or merely implement, traditional summary-judgment requirements—especially when a nonmovant § 1983 plaintiff relies on movants' video evidence to oppose summary judgment?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does Scott v. Harris alter or merely implement traditional summary-judgment
Docket Entries
2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-07-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-07-06
Waiver of right of respondent Steven Harmon, et al. to respond filed.
2021-06-04
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 8, 2021)
Attorneys
Jeriel Edwards
Steven Harmon, et al.
Anthony Joseph Ferate — Spencer Fane LLP, Respondent