Court Opinion

ID: 9477876
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 06:33:20.514165+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:46:05.769637
License: Public Domain

FLAUM, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I concur in section II C of the majority’s thorough opinion which addresses the question of the appellants’ qualified immunity. I agree with Judge Wood’s well-reasoned analysis that applying the correct legal standards the officers are immune from liability to Rakovich under § 1983. I would therefore reverse the district court’s denial of the appellants' motion for a directed verdict on qualified immunity grounds.
With regard to the issue of the officers’ right to either a directed verdict or a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, I would not find it necessary to address this very close question. Viewing the evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom in the light most favorable to Rakovich (the non-moving party) it may well be that reasonable jurors could differ over whether the officers unlawfully retaliated against Rako-vich for the exercise of his first amendment rights.
Respectfully, I therefore join only the portion of the majority opinion that holds that the appellants are entitled to a directed verdict based on qualified immunity.