Reichle v. Howards

Update: 2012-03-21

Description

A case in which the Court held that police officers and federal agents cannot be sued for violating someone’s rights, as long as the right that was supposedly violated was not formally recognized to exist at the time the officers acted.

Comments

In Channel

Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum

2012-10-0101:00:29

Arizona v. United States

2012-04-2501:20:27

Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band v. Patchak

2012-04-2401:02:23

RadLAX Gateway Hotel v. Amalgamated Bank

2012-04-2358:31

Salazar v. Ramah Navajo Chapter

2012-04-18--:--

Dorsey v. United States

2012-04-1701:02:28

Christopher v. SmithKline

2012-04-1601:03:11

National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius

2012-03-2801:30:58

National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius

2012-03-2702:00:08

National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius

2012-03-2601:29:19

Reichle v. Howards

2012-03-2159:19

Vasquez v. United States

2012-03-2101:01:16

Miller v. Alabama

2012-03-2059:41

Southern Union Company v. United States

2012-03-1957:23

Astrue v. Capato

2012-03-1901:00:59

Armour v. City of Indianapolis

2012-02-2901:00:34

Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum

2012-02-2801:01:32

Mohamad v. Palestinian Authority

2012-02-2850:35

Elgin v. Department of the Treasury

2012-02-2701:00:28

Wood v. Milyard

2012-02-2701:01:26

00:00

1.0x

#box-pro-ellipsis-175917848781224{-webkit-line-clamp:2;}Reichle v. Howards

Reichle v. Howards

Reichle v. Howards