Officer appealed denial of qualified immunity on First Amendment retaliatory use of force claim by protester; court affirms denial of qualified immunity on basis of facts asserted by plaintiff that she was merely participating in a peaceful protest and had done nothing more than come within a couple of feet of an officer; her right to be free from retaliatory use of force was clearly established.
Under Iowa law, arrestee’s passive refusal to comply with detectives’ request to enter home for welfare check on arrestee’s daughter did not constitute resistance or obstruction as crime to interfere with official acts and thus there was no probable cause for arrest; no arguable probable cause and no qualified immunity.
County policy of notifying ICE whenever foreign-born person was arrested and then detaining and transferring person into ICE custody violated detainee’s equal protection rights.
Where protestors were boxed into a “kettle,” beaten, pepper sprayed, and arrested in demonstration that was generally peaceful and not all arrested persons were part of a unit violating the law, officers were not entitled to qualified immunity on false arrest claim; supervisors who did not order or observe or intent excessive force were entitled to qualified immunity on excessive force claim; officers entitled to qualified immunity on conspiracy claim due to unsettled status of incorporate conspiracy doctrine in § 1983 cases.
St.
Officer who pepper sprayed woman live streaming a video of police officers’ activity violated her clearly established First Amendment rights and was not entitled to qualified immunity; “arguable probable cause” was not relevant to the claim because plaintiff did not complain of a search or seizure.
Claim for false arrest accrued when criminal defendant was bound over for trial; claim for unlawful seizure of property accrued at time of seizure.
Officers who stopped vehicle because they claimed they could not read the temporary license plate tag in vehicle’s rear window and because a passenger gave them a suspicious look, violated plaintiff’s clearly established rights and were not entitled to qualified immunity, affirming summary judgment in favor of plaintiff; failure to make out the tag did not constitute a particularized basis for believing vehicle was unregistered.
Intracorporate conspiracy doctrine bars § 1985 claims against officers from same department; because circuit has not decided whether intracorporate conspiracy doctrine bars § 1983 claims, law is not clearly established and officers are entitled to qualified immunity on § 1983 conspiracy claims.
Racial profiling claim rejected where purportedly similarly situated comparators in traffic stops were not similarly situated in all relevant respects.