§Why CasetextPricing

Wormley v. United States of America et al

Memorandum in opposition to re MOTION for Summary Judgment, 38 MOTION to Dismiss, 40 MOTION for Joinder Defendants Corrections Corporation of America and Officer Tutwiler's Joinder in Defendant District of Columbia's Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment

39 Cited authorities

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 239,217 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

  2. Saucier v. Katz

    533 U.S. 194 (2001)   Cited 20,440 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding when a defendant seeks qualified immunity, "a ruling on that issue should be made early in the proceedings so that the costs and expenses of trial are avoided where the defense is dispositive."

  3. Harlow v. Fitzgerald

    457 U.S. 800 (1982)   Cited 31,873 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that public officials are entitled to a "qualified immunity" from "liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established . . . rights of which a reasonable person would have known"

  4. Preiser v. Rodriguez

    411 U.S. 475 (1973)   Cited 18,413 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that even if the state prisoners' requested relief had "merely shortened the length of their confinement . . . their suits would still have been within the core of habeas corpus in attacking the very duration of their physical confinement itself"

  5. Smith v. Wade

    461 U.S. 30 (1983)   Cited 3,194 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a showing of maliciousness is not required for "recovery of punitive damages"

  6. County of Riverside v. McLaughlin

    500 U.S. 44 (1991)   Cited 1,776 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that detentions of more than 48 hours without a judicial determination of probable cause are presumptively unconstitutional

  7. Sample v. Diecks

    885 F.2d 1099 (3d Cir. 1989)   Cited 2,658 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a prison official violated an inmate's Eighth Amendment rights where the official exhibited deliberate indifference by wrongly determining that the inmate still had time to serve and caused the inmate's detention to be prolonged by nine months

  8. E.E.O.C. v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial

    117 F.3d 621 (D.C. Cir. 1997)   Cited 1,298 times
    Holding that question of whether defendant was a covered entity under ADA is not jurisdictional, but merits related

  9. Laningham v. U.S. Navy

    813 F.2d 1236 (D.C. Cir. 1987)   Cited 1,163 times
    Finding that Navy did not act intentionally or willfully under § 552a(g) because it was "warranted [in its] belief that its actions were lawful [under the Privacy Act]"

  10. Warren v. District of Columbia

    353 F.3d 36 (D.C. Cir. 2004)   Cited 471 times
    Holding factual statements, in which the plaintiff alleged that prison officials “stuck the same needles in everybody's arms”, sufficient to state a claim of a custom or policy causing a constitutional violation

  11. Section 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights

    42 U.S.C. § 1983   Cited 496,982 times   701 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation

  12. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 354,229 times   943 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  13. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 333,232 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  14. Section 1367 - Supplemental jurisdiction

    28 U.S.C. § 1367   Cited 63,426 times   78 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in civil actions proceeding in federal court based solely on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the district court "shall not have supplemental jurisdiction" over "claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule . . . 24" or "over claims by persons . . seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24," if "exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of section 1332"

  15. Section 1997e - Suits by prisoners

    42 U.S.C. § 1997e   Cited 54,846 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that prisoners must exhaust "available" administrative remedies before filing suit in federal court