Drew Whitley v. County of Allegheny

402 F. App'x 713
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit
DecidedNovember 22, 2010
Docket10-1723
StatusUnpublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 402 F. App'x 713 (Drew Whitley v. County of Allegheny) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Drew Whitley v. County of Allegheny, 402 F. App'x 713 (3d Cir. 2010).

Opinions

OPINION OF THE COURT

NYGAARD, Circuit Judge.

Because this opinion is wholly without precedential value we write briefly for the benefit of the parties, presuming their familiarity with the facts and procedural history of this case. Whitley appeals the grant of summary judgment in favor of the Defendants. We will affirm.

Whitley was arrested and convicted in 1989 for a 1988 murder, and he subsequently served seventeen years in prison. A DNA test in 2006 established Whitley’s innocence. As a result, Whitley filed this suit against certain police officers and Allegheny County alleging, both, state law claims for malicious prosecution and constitutional violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.

Whitley appeals three of the District Court’s rulings. First, he challenges the District Court’s decision applying the doctrine of collateral estoppel to Whitley’s malicious prosecution claims. Whitley also takes issue with the District Court’s ruling that the individual Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. The District Court reasoned that, in 1989, there was not a clearly established right arising from the relationship between the constitutional entitlement to a fair trial and the level of care taken in criminal investigations. Finally, Whitley appeals the District Court’s dismissals of the section 1983 claims against Allegheny County, which were based upon the District Court’s related finding that the individual Defendants did not violate a clearly established right.1

We exercise plenary review of the District Court’s grant of summary judgment. Webb v. City of Philadelphia, 562 F.3d 256, 259 (3d Cir.2009). After our careful, independent review of the record in this case and the arguments raised by both parties, we will affirm the order for essentially the same reasons set forth by the District Court.

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

Related

MUCY v. NAGY
W.D. Pennsylvania, 2021
HARVARD v. CESNALIS
W.D. Pennsylvania, 2019
Dean v. Smith
805 F. Supp. 2d 750 (D. Nebraska, 2011)
Whitley v. Allegheny County
179 L. Ed. 2d 936 (Supreme Court, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
402 F. App'x 713, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/drew-whitley-v-county-of-allegheny-ca3-2010.