United States Tenth Circuit

In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action alleging that defendant-sheriff used excessive and unreasonable force against her in the course of taking her adult daughter into protective custody, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) no Fourth Amendment seizure of plaintiff occurred; 2) for purposes of a substantive due process claim, plaintiff could not establish that the sheriff's conduct shocked the conscience; 3) thus, plaintiff could not show the violation of a constitutional right and sheriff was entitled to qualified immunity; and 4) the district court correctly dismissed other claims.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/23/2008
• Published 01/24/2008

Judges

• McKAY, Circuit Judge., Before TYMKOVICH, McKAY, and SEYMOUR, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• David S. Pace, Pace & Schmidt, L.L.C., Salt Lake City, Utah, for Plaintiff-Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Peter Stirba (Sarah E. Spencer with him on the brief), Stirba & Associates, Salt Lake City, Utah, for Defendants-Appellees.