# D.D. v. James Scheeler

> Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · April 14, 2016 · 645 F. App'x 418

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9864249

## Case

- **Full name:** D.D., Individually and as Father and Friend on Behalf of S.D., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. James SCHEELER, Police Officer Springfield Township Police Department [Badge 246], Defendant-Appellant and Springfield Township, Et Al., Defendants
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- **Decided:** April 14, 2016
- **Citations:** 645 F. App'x 418
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Rogers
- **Judges:** Siler, Gibbons, Rogers
- **Cited by:** 9 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/9864249

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that the officer was not entitled to qualified immunity because “no competent officer would have found probable cause to arrest S.D.” (citing Leonard, 477 F.3d at 355 )

## Opinion text

*428 ROGERS, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
Except in unusual circumstances not present here, we should not reverse a district court judgment based on arguments not raised in the district court. Considering such an argument not raised below can be justified today only because we are not reversing the district court, but rather rejecting the appellant’s alternative argument. Doing so precludes the possibility of a second interlocutory appeal from a district court denial of a second motion for summary judgment. But this rationale does not extend to situations where we accept the appellant’s new argument. Litigants should understand that our willingness to consider an argument not presented below in this case depends on our contemporaneous determination to reject the argument.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9864249. Public record. Not legal advice.