• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
26 results

William Felkner, Petitioner v. John Nazarian, et al.

Docket 23-274, Supreme Court of the United States (Sept. 21, 2023)
Petitioner William Felkner
Respondent John Nazarian
Other Foundation for Moral Law
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Reply of petitioner William Felkner - Certificate of Word Count

Document William Felkner, Petitioner v. John Nazarian, et al., 23-274, Reply of petitioner William Felkner, Certificate of Word Count (U.S. Jan. 25, 2024)
No. 23-274 In the Supreme Court of the United States
Respectfully submitted, hereby certify on this 25th day of January, 2024, that the above referenced reply brief contains 2,998 words.
Thomas W. Lyons Rhiannon S. Huffman
1225 19th St. NW, Ste.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Reply of petitioner William Felkner - Proof of Service

Document William Felkner, Petitioner v. John Nazarian, et al., 23-274, Reply of petitioner William Felkner, Proof of Service (U.S. Jan. 25, 2024)
No. 23-274 In the Supreme Court of the United States
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Reply of petitioner William Felkner - Main Document

Document William Felkner, Petitioner v. John Nazarian, et al., 23-274, Reply of petitioner William Felkner, Main Document (U.S. Jan. 25, 2024)
If this Court were to deny certiorari and permit the judgment below to stand, officials in state colleges will continue to academically punish students for the exercise of their First Amendment rights.
The logic of Egbert (and the cases preceding it) is equally applicable to the qualified immunity doctrine which rests almost entirely on this Court’s evaluation of what is “the best attainable accommodation of competing values,” Harlow, 457 U.S. at 814—“precisely the sort of freewheeling policy choice that” this Court has left for Congress to make.
The Court can hold that qualified immunity does not protect a campus desk officer has ample opportunity to consult legal counsel before engaging in conduct that violates the First Amendment.
Better yet, the Court can recognize that Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) which established the doctrine in the first place, rested on erroneous historical premises and permit all government officials to be held to account for violating citizens’ constitutional rights.
Second, the Supreme Court of Rhode Island has already held that Felkner “has made tenable claims that defendants have violated his constitutional rights to free speech and expression,” and that such “claims deserve to go to a jury.” App.93a.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Brief of John Nazarian in opposition - Main Document

Document William Felkner, Petitioner v. John Nazarian, et al., 23-274, Brief of John Nazarian in opposition, Main Document (U.S. Jan. 3, 2024)
In any event, none of Felkner’s various suggestions for how the Court might scrap or modify its qualified immunity precedent—by either eliminating the clearly established law standard altogether, eliminating that standard in cases that do ...
Indeed, this case is a particularly poor vehicle to reconsider the Court’s qualified immunity doctrine because none of Felkner’s proposed changes to the doctrine would change the result in this case.
None is close.
None of the cases that Felkner cites is even remotely similar to this case.
In any event, Felkner’s preferred “fair and clear warning” standard (Pet. 34) would not help him because, as the Rhode Island Supreme Court correctly held, none of the inapposite cases cited by Felkner would have given respondents ...
First, as explained, none of Felkner’s proposed departures from existing precedent would change the outcome of this case.
cite Cite Document
Analyze
+ More Snippets

Brief of John Nazarian in opposition - Proof of Service

Document William Felkner, Petitioner v. John Nazarian, et al., 23-274, Brief of John Nazarian in opposition, Proof of Service (U.S. Jan. 3, 2024)
No. 23-274 In the Supreme Court of the United States
On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Rhode Island
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Brief of John Nazarian in opposition - Certificate of Word Count

Document William Felkner, Petitioner v. John Nazarian, et al., 23-274, Brief of John Nazarian in opposition, Certificate of Word Count (U.S. Jan. 3, 2024)
No. 23-274 In the Supreme Court of the United States
On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 33.1(h), I certify that the Brief in Opposition in the above-referenced case contains 8,536 words, excluding the parts of the brief exempted by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(d).
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Brief of respondents John Nazarian et al - Proof of Service

Document William Felkner, Petitioner v. John Nazarian, et al., 23-274, Brief of respondents John Nazarian et al, Proof of Service (U.S. Jan. 3, 2024)
No. 23-274 In the Supreme Court of the United States
On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Rhode Island
cite Cite Document
Analyze
1 2 3 >>