- Tags:
- Show more
- Pages:
- 2
- Words:
- 550
Student’s Name Instructor’s Name Course Details Date LEATHERMAN et al.v.TARRANT COUNTY NARCOTICS INTELLIGENCE AND COORDINATION UNIT et al. No. 91-1657.Argued January 12, 1993. Decided March 3, 1993. Facts The plaintiffs moved the court on the grounds that the defendants acted negligently in executing searches in their various homes. The appellants were of the view that the search conducted in their premises violated that 4th Amendment of the United States of America Constitution (Leatherman 1). The court of appeals had changed the pleading standard as laid out in section 1983; hence the pleadings by the plaintiffs did not meet the “heightened pleading standard” as required by the fifth circuit of appeal judges (Leatherman 1). The subordinate court found for the respondents, on appeal, the fifth circuit of appeals upheld the district court’s decision hence this suit (Leatherman 1). Issue The issue that was found worth deliberating on by the supreme court of the United States of America was, whether it was proper for the federal court to apply a “heightened pleading standard” in the case that was instituted by the plaintiffs (Leatherman 1). The “heightened pleading standard” was more wanting than that borne in the federal rules of civil procedure for civil rights cases that cited municipal responsibility. Section 1983 applied to civil rights cases where liabilities fall within the demarcations of 42 USC s1983. Holding/Rationale The Supreme Court ruled for the appellants. The Supreme Court in a unanimous delivered by Rehnquist held that a federal court cannot apply a "heightened pleading standard" as this was in contravention of the
Leave feedback