Conner v. Heiman, et al., No. 10-17545 (9th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff sued two Nevada Gaming Control Board agents under 42 U.S.C. 1983, claiming that the agents violated his Fourth Amendment rights by arresting him without probable cause to believe he had committed a crime. The court held that the district court erred when it reserved the issue of whether the agents had qualified immunity for the jury even though the parties did not materially dispute what facts the agents knew when they arrested plaintiff. The court also held that the agents did not violate clearly established rights by arresting plaintiff. Accordingly, the agents were entitled to qualified immunity and the court reversed the district court's denial of their motion for summary judgment.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.