finding that parole officers are entitled to only qualified immunity for arresting and imprisoning parolee for 27 days without holding a preliminary hearing to determine probable cause
How later courts described this case
- finding that parole officers are entitled to only qualified immunity for arresting and imprisoning parolee for 27 days without holding a preliminary hearing to determine probable cause
- parole officers entitled to qualified immunity with respect to arrest of parolee
- Sixth Circuit adopting Harlow test for state officials
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WEICK, Senior Circuit Judge,
concurring in part:
I concur in all of the opinion of the panel except that portion which remands to the district court for reconsideration of the motion of the parole officers for summary judgment.
In my opinion, under the decision of the Supreme Court in Harlow, Butz and Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232 , 94 S.Ct. 1683 , 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974), the parole officers were entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law and the district judge erred in not granting their motion for summary judgment. We should now enter the judgment which the district court should have entered and grant their motion for summary judgment and assess the costs against plaintiff-appellee. It is time that this prolonged litigation be brought to a close as it has no merit.