Crow v. Pelken

Fifth Circuit

Crow v. Pelken

264 F. App'x 421

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 1, 2008

Docket07-40202

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 264 F. App'x 421 (Crow v. Pelken) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Crow v. Pelken, 264 F. App'x 421 (5th Cir. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Robert Crow appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendants and awarding Defendants their costs. This Court has considered the record in light of the briefs and oral argument, and we affirm. The evidence does not establish that all reasonable police officers would have found probable cause lacking under the facts of this case, and Defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity. Babb v. Dorman, 33 F.3d 472, 477 (5th Cir.1994). We likewise find no abuse of discretion in the award of costs to Defendants. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM: *

Robert Crow appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendants and awarding Defendants their costs. This Court has considered the record in light of the briefs and oral argument, and we affirm. The evidence does not establish that all reasonable police officers would have found probable cause lacking under the facts of this case, and Defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity. Babb v. Dorman, 33 F.3d 472, 477 (5th Cir.1994). We likewise find no abuse of discretion in the award of costs to Defendants. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 F. App'x 421, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crow-v-pelken-ca5-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack