Brosseau v.Haugen held that
A) "If the law at that time did not clearly establish that the officer's conduct would violate the Constitution,the officer should not be subject to liability,or indeed,even the burdens of litigation."
B) "If the law at that time did not clearly establish that the officer's conduct would violate the Constitution,the officer should be subject to liability,or indeed,even the burdens of litigation."
C) "If the law at that time clearly established that the officer's conduct would violate the Constitution,the officer should not be subject to liability,or indeed,even the burdens of litigation."
D) "Police liability is limited when conduct occurs in the line of duty."
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q35: When it is determined that a person
Q36: The basis for liability under federal civil
Q37: The probable cause defense which is a
Q38: According to Harlow v.Fitzgerald government officials performing
A)mandatory
Q39: What is required for a Section 1983
Q41: Under which of the following can Officer
Q42: A defendant must have acted under _of
Q43: If Officer Morris and two witnesses stated
Q44: A Section 1983 case succeeds only if
Q45: Acting within the scope of authority means
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents