Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
City of East Cleveland, Ohio, et al. v. Derrick Wheatt, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, No. 17-4232 · judgment July 12, 2018
Before the decision, modestly above the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a petition filed soon after the judgment below, a state or local-government petitioner, and a Sixth Circuit decision below.
Questions presented
The questions presented herein are:
-
Whether the Court abused its discretion in denying Petitioner City Defendants Qualified Immunity defense when it became implicated during Discovery prior to the Discovery deadline pursuant to a “forfeiture” analysis.
-
Whether the Petitioner City Defendants were acting as state actors in the purported wrongful conviction actions brought against the City and the County Defendants and therefore the County must indemnify the Petitioner City Defendants.
-
Whether, upon limited remand, the District Court’s vacation of its finding that the County Defendants were not entitled to Qualified Immunity served to ipso facto vacate the Petitioner City Defendants’ Qualified Immunity defense denial as well.
-
Whether the District Court’s denial of Petitioner City Defendants’ Motion to Amend their Answer was an abuse of discretion.
-
Whether the Settlement Agreement between the County Defendants and the Plaintiffs renders the Case Against the Petitioner City Defendants moot.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Willa Mae Hemmons
City of East Cleveland
For respondent
—
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Nov 05 2018Petition DENIED.
- Oct 17 2018DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/2/2018.
- Sep 13 2018Application to Stay Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to Justice Elena Kagan of City of East Cleveland, et al. not accepted for filing. (September 24, 2018)
- Jul 20 2018Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 1, 2018)