JAY T. BROWN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
DEPUTY CONSTABLE JOHN GLOSSIP, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
JAY T. BROWN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
DEPUTY CONSTABLE JOHN GLOSSIP, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
920 F.2d 322
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1991)
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:
This case, before us a second time, needs little if any attention. We need note only that under Shillingford v. Holmes, 634 F. 2d 263 (5th Cir.1981), Brown’s allegations are sufficient to controvert Glossip’s qualified immunity defense. Consequently, the district court’s denial of Glossip’s motion to dismiss was entirely appropriate.
As a postscript, we add that our earlier opinion, Brown v. Glossip, 878 F. 2d 871 (5th Cir.1989), should be interpreted as applying, consistent with Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 639, 107 S.Ct. 3034, 3037, 97 L.Ed.2d 523 (1987), the “clearly established” legal rules as of the date of Glossip’s actions.
The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cont'l Grain Co. v. Puerto RICO Mar. Shipping Auth., 972 F.2d 426 (1st Cir. 1992)
-
Harwood v. Partredereit AF 15.5.81, 944 F.2d 1187 (4th Cir. 1991)
-
Bach v. Trident S.S. Co., Inc., 947 F.2d 1290 (5th Cir. 1991)
Authorities Cited
- Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 (U.S. 1987)
- Charles v. Shillingford, 634 F.2d 263 (5th Cir. 1981)
- Brown v. Deputy Constable John Glossip, 878 F.2d 871 (5th Cir. 1989)