FEAR's Brief Bank II: indexed by issue

****************************************************************************************

Summary judgment [ 417 ]

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT ON THE ISSUE OF WHETHER DEFENDANTS CONSPIRED WITH

OFFICIALS ACTING UNDER COLOR OF STATE LAW

The media defendants claim that they were not engaged in a conspiracy under color of state law -- as opposed to

federal law -- arguing that "[t]he DEA agents in this case derived their authority exclusively from federal law,

and therefore could not be said to be state officials or to have been working under color of state law." These

claims ignore the plain facts: the task force was a multi-jurisdictional task force, made up primarily of county

and local police officers. State action has been found in conspiracies involving a mixture of federal and state

agents, working together on a case. State action has been found where the actors are federal and state agents at

the same time -- i.e., where they serve two sovereigns simultaneously. State action has been found when the

actors worked for multijurisdictional entities created by contract between agencies of several sovereigns

by Grantland, Brenda

STEVEN v. AMERICAN BROADCASTING CO. INC., A.D. E.D.Cal. CIVS-94- ( 1997 )

ROSEVEARE and PRODUCTIONS

TOYA ROSEVEARE

browser view: available BrowserView filed:

Word Perfect available WordPerfect

MS_Word version: MSWord

RTF version: available RichTextFormat [ coloroflaw ]

PDF version: PDF [ 407 ]

.

Tuesday, May 03, 2011 Page 10 of 10
First Previous Next Last