City of Tahlequah v. Bond
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in City of Tahlequah v. Bond and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of City of Tahlequah v. Bond.
In City of Tahlequah v. Bond, the Supreme Court addressed whether police officers were entitled to qualified immunity after a fatal shooting incident involving Dominic Rollice. The Tenth Circuit had reversed a District Court's grant of summary judgment, but the Supreme Court found that the officers did not violate any clearly established law. The Court emphasized the importance of specific precedent in determining qualified immunity.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in City of Tahlequah v. Bond.
The Court held that the officers are entitled to qualified immunity from suit as their conduct did not violate clearly established law.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in City of Tahlequah v. Bond. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Search and Seizure is relevant to City of Tahlequah v. Bond
The case involves allegations of a Fourth Amendment violation regarding the use of excessive force by police officers.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Rollice's estate fled suit against, among others, Offcers Girdner and Vick, alleging that the offcers were liable under 42 U. S. C. § 1983, for violating Rollice's Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessive force.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to City of Tahlequah v. Bond
The Court reviewed the application of qualified immunity and whether the officers' conduct violated clearly established law.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The doctrine of qualifed immunity shields offcers from civil liability if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to City of Tahlequah v. Bond
The case involves the procedural aspect of whether the officers' actions were protected by qualified immunity, which is a procedural defense.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The District Court granted the offcers' motion for summary judgment, concluding that the offcers' use of force was reasonable and, even if not, that qualifed immunity prevented the case from going further.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in City of Tahlequah v. Bond that support the summary and concepts above.
The officers are entitled to qualified immunity from suit.
Qualified immunity protects 'all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.'
None of the decisions on which the Court of Appeals relied comes close to establishing that the officers' conduct was unlawful.
