Ashcroft v. Oregon
| Decision Date | 18 January 2011 |
| Docket Number | No. 10–7612.,10–7612. |
| Citation | Ashcroft v. Oregon, 562 U.S. 1188, 131 S.Ct. 1018(Mem), 178 L.Ed.2d 844(Mem) (2011) |
| Parties | Douglas Allen ASHCROFT, petitioner, v. OREGON, et al. |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
8 cases
-
Milbrand v. Miner, 4:17-cv-761
...or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was 'clearly established' at the time of the challenged conduct." Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 131 S. Ct. 2074, 2080 (2011) (quoting Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982)). A right is "clearly established" if it "would be clear to a reasonabl......
-
Yorzinski v. Imbert, 3:13-cv-01029 (MPS)
...'clearly established' at the time of the challenged conduct." Wood v. Moss, 134 S. Ct. 2056, 2066-67 (2014) (quoting Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 131 S. Ct. 2074, 2080 (2011)); see also Betts v. Shearman, 751 F.3d 78, 82-83 (2d Cir. 2014) (applying standard). The qualified immunity doctrine protect......
-
Jones v. Valdez
...incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law." Stanton v. Sims, 134 S. Ct. 3, 5 (2013) (per curiam) (quoting Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 131 S. Ct. 2074, 2085 (2011); internal quotation marks omitted); accord City & Cty. of San Francisco v. Sheehan, 135 S. Ct. 1765, 1774 (2015); see also Mul......
-
Patton v. Etowah Cnty.
...833. When the Supreme Court speaks directly to an issue, the law is as clearly established as it could possibly be. Cf. Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 131 S.Ct. 2074, 2085 (2011) ("Qualified immunity gives government officials breathing room to make reasonable but mistaken judgments about open legal ......
Get Started for Free