No. 20-1438
Tina Cates v. Bruce D. Stroud, et al.
Tags: civil-rights constitutional-law courts-of-appeals due-process fourth-amendment legal-doctrine precedent qualified-immunity search-and-seizure standing
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Patent Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
SocialSecurity FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Patent Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2021-10-08
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the unanimous conclusion of multiple other courts of appeals suffices to clearly establish the law for purposes of qualified immunity
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED The questions presented are: 1. Whether the unanimous conclusion of multiple other courts of appeals suffices to clearly establish the law for purposes of qualified immunity. 2. Whether general Fourth Amendment principles may render an unjustified search obviously unconstitutional and thus defeat qualified immunity. 3. Whether this Court should eliminate or revise the doctrine of qualified immunity.
Docket Entries
2021-10-12
Petition DENIED.
2021-09-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/8/2021.
2021-09-13
Reply of petitioner Tina Cates filed. (Distributed)
2021-09-01
Brief of respondents Bruce D. Stroud, et al. in opposition filed.
2021-08-02
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including September 1, 2021.
2021-07-30
Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 2, 2021 to September 1, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-06-30
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 2, 2021.
2021-06-29
Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 1, 2021 to August 2, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-06-01
Response Requested. (Due July 1, 2021)
2021-05-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/10/2021.
2021-05-14
Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed.
2021-05-11
Brief amici curiae of The American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, et al. filed.
2021-04-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 14, 2021)
Attorneys
Bruce D. Stroud, et al.
Heidi Jill Parry Stern — Office of the Nevada Attorney General, Respondent
Aaron Darnell Ford — Nevada Office of the Attorney General, Respondent
Constitutional Accountability Center
The American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, et al.
Christopher Marshall Peterson — ACLU of Nevada, Amicus
Tina Cates
James Reid Sigel — Morrison & Foerster, LLP, Petitioner