Behrens v. Pelletier
| Behrens v. Pelletier | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued November 7, 1995 Decided February 21, 1996 | |
| Full case name | Behrens v. Pelletier |
| Citations | 516 U.S. 299 (more) |
| Holding | |
| A defendant's immediate appeal of an unfavorable qualified-immunity ruling on a motion to dismiss does not deprive the court of appeals of jurisdiction over a second appeal, also based on qualified immunity, immediately following denial of summary judgment. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas and Ginsburg |
| Dissent | Breyer, joined by Stevens |
Behrens v. Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299 (1996) was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court, in which the court held a defendant's immediate appeal of an unfavorable qualified immunity ruling on a motion to dismiss does not deprive the court of appeals of jurisdiction over a second appeal, also based on qualified immunity, immediately following denial of summary judgment.
Background
The Federal Home Loan Bank Board fired Robert Pelletier (Plaintiff) as the provisional managing officer of Pioneer Savings and Loans Associations after the agent responsible for monitoring Pioneer’s operations, John Behrens (Defendant), recommended such action. The basis of Behrens recommendation was an investigation involving the collapse of another financial institution, and possible misconduct by Pelletier. Pelletier filled suite arguing wrongfully termination, and John Behrens claimed he was acting on behalf of the government and therefore was he was entitled to qualified immunity.[1]
Issue
At issue is if a defendent's initial appeal for qualified immunity is unfavorable, does this ruling deprive the court of appeals jurisdiction of over a subsequent appeal based on the same claim, i.e., qualified immunity.
References
External links
- http://www.quimbee.com
- http://docs.justia.com/cases/supreme/516/299.pdf
- http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/130/130.F3d.429.94-56507.html