Case Explained: Cooperstein v. Salt Lake City Corporation, et al.
カートのアイテムが多すぎます
カートに追加できませんでした。
ウィッシュリストに追加できませんでした。
ほしい物リストの削除に失敗しました。
ポッドキャストのフォローに失敗しました
ポッドキャストのフォロー解除に失敗しました
Case Explained: Cooperstein v. Salt Lake City Corporation, et al.
-
ナレーター：
-
著者：
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Filed: 2026-07-24
Docket: 2:23-CV-00468-DBP)
The Tenth Circuit summarily affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Plaintiff-Appellant Ian Cooperstein’s civil rights lawsuit against Salt Lake City police officers and municipal defendants. The court held that it could not proceed to the merits of Cooperstein’s Fourth Amendment claims because he failed to provide a sufficient appellate record. Specifically, Cooperstein omitted the motion-to-dismiss briefing and the body-camera footage that were central to the district court’s decision. Under the de novo standard of review applicable to Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals and qualified immunity determinations, the appellate court is obligated to independently evaluate the materials before the district court. Because the absence of these critical documents prevented the Tenth Circuit from conducting such review without resorting to guesswork, the judgment was affirmed. The dismissal with prejudice remains in effect.
Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.