Justin Hammett v. Paulding County, Georgia

886 F.3d 1335
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedApril 6, 2018
Docket16-15764
StatusPublished

This text of 886 F.3d 1335 (Justin Hammett v. Paulding County, Georgia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Justin Hammett v. Paulding County, Georgia, 886 F.3d 1335 (11th Cir. 2018).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The Petition(s) for Rehearing are DENIED and no Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc ( Rule 35, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure ), the Petition(s) for Rehearing En Banc are DENIED. **

The opinion and decision in this case do not decide that physical evidence could never sufficiently contradict sworn, eyewitness, personal-knowledge testimony so as to justify a denial of summary judgment. The inferences that might be reasonably drawn from the pertinent physical evidence here, however, are insufficient to support plaintiff's theory about the shooting incident underlying this case. Plaintiff's theory projects too far past the limits of the evidence that he has actually presented.

**

Judge Williams would grant the motion for panel rehearing.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
886 F.3d 1335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/justin-hammett-v-paulding-county-georgia-ca11-2018.