Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

23 F. App'x 855

Grays v. Anselmi

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided January 8, 2002

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2002-01-08

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 2004

Relies on Duncan v. Walker · SAUCIER v. KATZ Et Al. · Hudson v. McMillian

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2002-01-08

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1MEMORANDUM

¶2We have jurisdiction to review the district court’s order denying summary judgment based on qualified immunity.1 We assume for purposes of decision, without deciding, that Grays’ version of the material facts is true.2 Even so, it would not have been clear to a reasonable officer in Anselmi’s situation that her conduct violated the Eighth Amendment,3i.e., that she used more than “de minimis ... physical force” or “force ... of a sort repugnant to the conscience of mankind.” 4 Anselmi is therefore entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity.

¶3REVERSED.

¶4 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

¶5. Jeffers v. Gomez, 267 F.3d 895, 903 (9th Cir.2001).

¶6. Id.

¶7. See Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 121 S.Ct. 2151, 2156, 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001).

¶8. Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1, 10, 112 S.Ct. 995, 117 L.Ed.2d 156 (1992) (internal quotation marks omitted).

/23/fappx/855 · .json · Public domain