Citation network
Wallace Vs. Kato
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 21, 2007
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Syllabus October Term, 2006 Wallace V. KatoSearch
-
suit is that provided by the State for personal-injury torts, e.g., Owens v. OkureSearch
-
long as the Heck bar subsists. However, this Court generally refers to state-law tolling rules, e.g., Hardin v. StraubSearch
-
in which Souter, J., joined. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, J., joined. Wallace v. KatoSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Opinion of the Court Wallace V. KatoSearch
-
Supreme Court of the United States No. 05-1240 Andre Wallace, Petitioner V. KristenSearch
-
held that officers had arrested petitioner without probable cause, in violation of the Fourth Amendment. People v. WallaceSearch
-
s illegal arrest had not been sufficiently attenuated to render his statements admissible, see Brown v. IllinoisSearch
-
U. S. 590 (1975), and remanded for a new trial. Judgt. order reported sub nom. People v. WallaceSearch
-
his cause of action accrued at the time of his arrest, and not when his conviction was later set aside. Wallace v. ChicagoSearch
-
It is that which the State provides for personal-injury torts. Owens v. OkureSearch
-
s decision in Heck v. HumphreySearch
-
Bay Area Laundry and Dry Cleaning Pension Trust Fund v. FerbarSearch
-
Corp. of Cal. , 522 U. S. 192 , 201 (1997) (quoting Rawlings v. RaySearch
-
s contention that Heck v. HumphreySearch
-
Id. , at 482 (quoting Preiser v. RodriguezSearch
-
Quackenbush v. AllstateSearch
-
otherwise, the civil action will proceed, absent some other bar to suit. Edwards v. BalisokSearch
-
generally referred to state law for tolling rules, just as we have for the length of statutes of limitation. Hardin v. StraubSearch
-
Board of Regents of Univ. of State of N. Y. v. TomanioSearch
-
see Albright v. OliverSearch
-
was injured and suffered damages at the moment of his arrest, and was entitled to bring suit at that time. See Adler v. BeverlySearch
-
Heck bar was removed. Footnote 5 Justice Stevens reaches the same result by arguing that, under Stone v. PowellSearch
-
s general prohibition does not apply. See, e.g. , Herrera v. LeMasterSearch
-
Bostick v. PetersSearch
-
Agee v. WhiteSearch
-
Doescher v. EstelleSearch
-
Boyd v. MintzSearch
-
n. 37 (emphasis added). Wallace v. KatoSearch
-
Andre Wallace, Petitioner V. KristenSearch
-
s argument before this Court is that Heck v. HumphreySearch
-
U. S. 475 , 490 (1973)). Given our holding in Stone v. PowellSearch
-
stay the trial of claims of this kind until after the completion of state proceedings, see, e.g. , Quackenbush v. AllstateSearch
-
cf. Younger v. HarrisSearch
-
Footnote 3 See Spencer v. KemnaSearch
-
Breyer, J., Dissenting Wallace V. KatoSearch
-
claim is not postponed by the presence of a possible bar to suit under Heck v. HumphreySearch
-
have found it appropriate to stay the trial of his claims until the completion of state proceedings. E.g., Quackenbush v. AllstateSearch
-
Miller v. RunyonSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial