No. 21-96

Paul Daniels, et al. v. County of Alameda, California, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-07-23
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: civil-rights federal-law malicious-prosecution probable-cause retaliation section-1983 state-law
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity FirstAmendment CriminalProcedure LaborRelations JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2021-09-27
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Where absence of probable cause to prosecute is an element of a federal section 1983 civil-rights claim

Question Presented (from Petition)

Question Presented Where absence of probable cause to prosecute is an element of a federal section 1983 civil rights claim — for example a malicious or retaliatory prosecution claim — is the probable cause determination governed by federal law or state law? i

Docket Entries

2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-08-04
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-07-27
Waiver of right of respondent County of Alameda, CA, et al. to respond filed.
2021-06-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 23, 2021)

Attorneys

County of Alameda, CA, et al.
Steven A. HirschKeker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, Respondent
Steven A. HirschKeker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, Respondent
Paul Daniels, et al.
Violet Elizabeth GraysonAttorney at Law, Petitioner
Violet Elizabeth GraysonAttorney at Law, Petitioner