May 22 2026
11th Cir. 1:22-cv-00776-VMC Published

ABIGAIL JEAN MARBUT v. MATTHEW PHILLIPS

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for four police officers in a Fourth Amendment suit arising from a seizure of a suspected overdose victim. The court held that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity because they had an objectively reasonable basis to seize the plaintiff under the emergency-aid doctrine.

May 22 2026
6th Cir. 25-1201 Published

Cotton v. Hughes

The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit dismissed portions of an appeal regarding qualified immunity while affirming the denial of immunity on other claims. The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review Heck doctrine arguments and factual disputes, but found that genuine issues of material fact precluded summary judgment on Brady and malicious prosecution claims.

May 22 2026
United States Court… 24-5193 Panel Decision

Narragansett Indian Tribe v. McMaster

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed a district court ruling that the Federal Highway Administration adequately consulted with the Narragansett Indian Tribe regarding a bridge reconstruction project. The court held that the Tribe was not a required signatory to the programmatic agreement because the affected historic properties were not on tribal land.

May 21 2026
11th Cir. 1:21-cv-02279-MHC Published

Nicholas S. Bolton v. Sheriff of Coweta County, Ga John Taylor Collins

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for law enforcement officers in a Fourth Amendment excessive force case. The court held that the deputies were entitled to qualified immunity because their use of force was objectively reasonable and the law was not clearly established.

May 21 2026
11th Cir. 6:22-cv-02041-ACC-EJK Unpublished

Baytree, Condominium, Section Eight, Inc. v. Clear Blue Specialty Insurance Company

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of an appraisal motion but reversed summary judgment on an insurance claim due to a dispute over prejudice from late notice. The court held that evidence from the insurer's own experts created a jury question on whether the delay in reporting roof damage prejudiced the investigation.