# Rippstein v. Barr

> Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · December 21, 2007 · 261 F. App'x 641

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9414937

## Case

- **Full name:** Cynthia Morgan RIPPSTEIN, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Geoffrey BARR, Defendant-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- **Decided:** December 21, 2007
- **Citations:** 261 F. App'x 641
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Dennis
- **Judges:** DeMOSS, Dennis, Owen, Per Curiam
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9414937

## Opinion text

DENNIS, Circuit Judge,
concurring separately.
I respectfully concur in the judgment. The majority reached the right result in granting qualified immunity to the defendant. I disagree with the district court opinion adopted by the majority in two respects.
First, the plaintiffs claim of a Fourth Amendment violation can be analogized to the situation in United States v. Certain Real Property Located near Highway 195, 163 F.3d 1295 , 1298-301 (11th Cir.1998), which supports the appellant’s position that a seizure of real property occurred. While I believe a seizure occurred, I nevertheless agree with the majority in granting qualified immunity to the defendant, because, under the circumstances, seizure was not objectively unreasonable.
Second, I disagree with the majority in that the defendant probably did violate Fourteenth Amendment rights as the plaintiff alleges, but I agree with the majority in granting qualified immunity, be *644 cause those rights were not clearly established at the time of the violation.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9414937. Public record. Not legal advice.