C & C METAL PRODUCTS CORP. ET AL.

v.

DEFIANCE BUTTON MACHINE CO.

Citator

Cited By (20 total)

• Meade v. Grubbs, 841 F.2d 1512 (10th Cir. 1988)
  …haps actionable under state law, is not of constitutional magnitude. While it is true that “[n]ot all force used by police rises to a constitutional violation,” Hewitt v. City of Truth or Consequences, 758 F. 2d 1375, 1379 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 844, 106 S.Ct. 181, 88 L.Ed.2d 108, (1985), it is equally true that the use of excessive force against an arres-tee or pretrial detainee, like Meade, is actionable under § 1983 as a deprivation of life or liberty without due process of law, in violation…
• Dixon v. Deputy Sheriff Donald Richer, 922 F.2d 1456 (10th Cir. 1991)
  …witt v. City of Truth or Consequences, 758 F. 2d 1375, 1378 (10th Cir.) (when the plaintiff did not articulate a specific constitutional provision violated by excessive use of force, the court applied substantive due process analysis), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 844, 106 S.Ct. 131, 88 L.Ed.2d 108 (1985). We did not, however, “exclude[] other grounds for relief.” Trujillo v. Goodman, 825 F. 2d at 1457 (applying due process analysis since it was the only claim the plaintiff pressed on appeal); McKay v. Hammock,…
• Hannula v. City OF Lakewood, 907 F.2d 129 (10th Cir. 1990)
  …ally examined claims of excessive use of force under a substantive due process standard. See e.g., Trujillo v. Goodman, 825 F. 2d 1453, 1457 (10th Cir.1987); Hewitt v. City of Truth or Consequences, 758 F. 2d 1375, 1378-79 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 844, 106 S.Ct. 131, 88 L.Ed.2d 108 (1985); Wise v. Bravo, 666 F. 2d 1328, 1333-34 (10th Cir.1981). Hannula must therefore show that Lively’s actions clearly constituted an excessive use of force under our former substantive due process standard. Unde…