Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2004 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Gene Autrey Adams v. Paul Metivagreen2 sentences2004In Harlow, the Supreme Court articulated the test for qualified immunity and stated that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Id. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 (abandoning the subjective good faith approach to addressing qualified immunity for the more objective reasonableness test); see also Noble, 87 F.3d 375, 386 (6th Cir.1994); Adams v. Metiva, 31 F.3d 375, 386 (6th Cir.1994). 1 2004In Harlow , the Supreme Court articulated the test for qualified immunity and stated that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Id. at 818 , 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (abandoning the subjective good faith approach to addressing qualified immunity for the more objective reasonableness test); see also Noble, 87 F.3d at 161 ; Adams v. Metiva, 31 F.3d 375, 386 | 2 | 2 |
Sherman L.G. Noble v. Janice Schmitt and Connie Stevensgreen1 sentence2004In Harlow , the Supreme Court articulated the test for qualified immunity and stated that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Id. at 818 , 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (abandoning the subjective good faith approach to addressing qualified immunity for the more objective reasonableness test); see also Noble, 87 F.3d at 161 ; Adams v. Metiva, 31 F.3d 375, 386 | 1 | 1 |
Graham v. Connorgreen2 sentences2004Thus, the mere fact that the defendant believes that his conduct is justified would not suffice to justify his conduct.” In Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396-97 , 109 S. Ct. 1865, 1872 (1989), a case involving excessive force under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , the United States Supreme Court explained that the Fourth Amendment’s objective reasonableness standard must be evaluated “from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight” and “must embody the allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments -- i 2004Thus, the mere fact that the defendant believes that his conduct is justified would not suffice to justify his conduct.” In Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396-97 , 109 S. Ct. 1865, 1872 (1989), a case involving excessive force under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , the United States Supreme Court explained that the Fourth Amendment’s objective reasonableness standard must be evaluated “from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight” and “must embody the allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments -- i | 1 | 1 |
Strickland v. Washingtongreen1 sentence2000See Strickland, 466 U.S. at 691 , 104 S. Ct. [at] 2052. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Harlow v. Fitzgerald
green
2 sentences2004In Harlow , the Supreme Court articulated the test for qualified immunity and stated that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Id. at 818 , 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (abandoning the subjective good faith approach to addressing qualified immunity for the more objective reasonableness test); see also Noble, 87 F.3d at 161 ; Adams v. Metiva, 31 F.3d 375, 386 2004In Harlow , the Supreme Court articulated the test for qualified immunity and stated that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Id. at 818 , 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (abandoning the subjective good faith approach to addressing qualified immunity for the more objective reasonableness test); see also Noble, 87 F.3d at 161 ; Adams v. Metiva, 31 F.3d 375, 386 | 3 | 1998–2004 |
Spurlock v. Satterfield
green
2 sentences2004In Harlow, the Supreme Court articulated the test for qualified immunity and stated that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Id. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 (abandoning the subjective good faith approach to addressing qualified immunity for the more objective reasonableness test); see also Noble, 87 F.3d 375, 386 (6th Cir.1994); Adams v. Metiva, 31 F.3d 375, 386 (6th Cir.1994). 1 2004In Harlow , the Supreme Court articulated the test for qualified immunity and stated that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Id. at 818 , 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (abandoning the subjective good faith approach to addressing qualified immunity for the more objective reasonableness test); see also Noble, 87 F.3d at 161 ; Adams v. Metiva, 31 F.3d 375, 386 | 2 | 2004–2004 |
Scott v. Henrich
green
1 sentence2004For example, in Scott v. Henrich, 39 F.3d 912 (9th Cir. 1994), a wife sued police officers for excessive force after they shot and killed her husband, who had barricaded himself in an apartment building. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.