Opinion ID: 794492
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: standard of review

Text: 12 We review the district court's denial of defendant[s'] claims that [they are] entitled to absolute or qualified immunity de novo, as that issue is a question of law. Spurlock v. Satterfield, 167 F.3d 995, 1000 (6th Cir.1999). The defendants filed a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment; the district court treated the defendants' qualified-immunity claim as a motion for summary judgment. In reviewing the district court's denial of a motion for summary judgment, we mak[e] all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party to determine if a genuine issue of material fact exists. Ireland v. Tunis, 113 F.3d 1435, 1440 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 996, 118 S.Ct. 560, 139 L.Ed.2d 401 (1997). `Summary judgment is appropriate only where there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.' Id. (quoting Pusey v. City of Youngstown, 11 F.3d 652, 655 (6th Cir.1993)).