Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Christopher Zook, et al. v. Scott Fuqua

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, No. 24-2152 · judgment November 4, 2025


1%
estimated cert probability
(petition-stage, structural)
GVR risk 10%

Well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Questions presented

  1. Video evidence standard at Rule 12(b)(6). Whether a district court may, or must, consider objective video evidence at the motion-to-dismiss stage when that evidence is central to the complaint and blatantly contradicts or utterly discredits the allegations of a plaintiff's complaint in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 excessive-force action, given a circuit split between the Sixth and Eleventh Circuits (which permit consideration of such videos) and the Tenth Circuit (which does not)?

  2. False Plausibility. Whether a § 1983 plaintiff can satisfy the plausibility standard of Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), and Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), by strategically omitting known facts, here, that the decedent fled the police in a reckless manner by vehicle, fired a weapon at officers just prior to being shot, and was running toward an occupied civilian vehicle at the time of the shooting, when including those facts would defeat the claim?

  3. Clearly established law and Tennessee v. Garner. Whether Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), standing alone, clearly establishes a Fourth Amendment violation sufficient to defeat qualified immunity at the pleading stage in a factually complex officer-involved shooting in which the decedent had moments earlier fired a weapon at officers, ignored repeated commands, and fled toward an occupied civilian vehicle, contrary to this Court's repeated instructions that clearly established law must be defined with specificity and particularity to the facts

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Brandon G. Huss
The New Mexico Association of Counties

For respondent
Kenneth Douglas Perrin
The Perrin Law Firm, PC

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences

Proceedings

  1. Jul 29 2026
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2026.
  2. Jul 15 2026
    Brief of respondent Scott Fuqua in opposition filed.
  3. Jun 12 2026
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from June 15, 2026 to July 15, 2026, submitted to The Clerk.
  4. Jun 12 2026
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including July 15, 2026.
  5. May 15 2026
    Response Requested. (Due June 15, 2026)
  6. May 05 2026
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/21/2026.
  7. Mar 19 2026
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 22, 2026)