Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Camreta Vs. Greene

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 16, 2011

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

61 entries 13 linked 48 unlinked
Show
  1. Deakins Vs. Monaghan US Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1988
  2. Honig Vs. Doe US Supreme Court · Jan 20, 1988
  3. Anderson Vs. Creighton US Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1987
  4. Wilson Vs. Layne US Supreme Court · Mar 24, 1999
  5. Forsyth Vs. Hammond US Supreme Court · Apr 19, 1897
  6. Defunis Vs. Odegaard US Supreme Court · Apr 23, 1974
  7. Alvarez Vs. Smith US Supreme Court · Dec 08, 2009
  8. Pearson Vs. Callahan US Supreme Court · Jan 21, 2009
  9. Harlow Vs. Fitzgerald US Supreme Court · Jun 24, 1982
  10. County of Sacramento Vs. Lewis US Supreme Court · Dec 09, 1997
  11. Atherton Mills Vs. Johnston US Supreme Court · May 15, 1922
  12. Arave Vs. Hoffman US Supreme Court · Jan 07, 2008
  13. Karcher Vs. May US Supreme Court · Dec 01, 1987
  14. Alford v. Greene
    Search
  15. Et Al. Syllabus October Term, 2010 Camreta V. Greene
    Search
  16. in the suit. Summers v. Earth
    Search
  17. Lujan v. Defenders
    Search
  18. Los Angeles v. Lyons
    Search
  19. the necessary stake not only at the outset of litigation, but throughout its course. Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona
    Search
  20. case or controversy, no matter that the appealing party was the prevailing party below. See Deposit Guaranty Nat. Bank v. Roper
    Search
  21. Electrical Fittings Corp. v. Thomas
    Search
  22. and Bivens v. Six
    Search
  23. courts to determine whether a right exists before examining whether it was clearly established. See, e.g ., Pearson v. Callahan
    Search
  24. Bunting v. Mellen
    Search
  25. there is no live controversy to review. United States v. Concentrated
    Search
  26. practice is to vacate the judgment below, see, e.g., United States v. Munsingwear
    Search
  27. Alford, Deputy Sheriff, Deschutes County, Oregon v. Greene
    Search
  28. Personally and as Next Friend of S. G., a Minor, et al., also on certiorari to the same court. Camreta v. Greene
    Search
  29. Opinion of the Court Camreta V. Greene
    Search
  30. s right to appeal, see United States v. Munsingwear
    Search
  31. s case-or-controversy requirement. See Deposit Guaranty Nat. Bank v. Roper
    Search
  32. consider cases at the request of a prevailing party, even when the Constitution allowed us to do so. See, e.g., Gunn v. University
    Search
  33. New York Telephone Co. v. Maltbie
    Search
  34. see also Bunting v. Mellen
    Search
  35. s favor. See California v. Rooney
    Search
  36. invoked in this case) and Bivens v. Six
    Search
  37. right, they are shielded from personal liability, Harlow v. Fitzgerald
    Search
  38. Lyng v. Northwest
    Search
  39. see also Ashwander v. TVA
    Search
  40. situation because it threatens to leave standards of official conduct permanently in limbo. County of Sacramento v. Lewis
    Search
  41. and the promotion of law-abiding behavior. Pearson v. Callahan
    Search
  42. Saucier v. Katz
    Search
  43. we have no live controversy to review. United States v. Concentrated
    Search
  44. see, e.g., Atherton Mills v. Johnston
    Search
  45. that ruling. U. S. Bancorp Mortgage Co. v. Bonner
    Search
  46. See, e.g. , Arave v. Hoffman
    Search
  47. Selig v. Pediatric
    Search
  48. above. But some kinds of constitutional questions do not often come up in these alternative settings. Pearson v. Callahan
    Search
  49. when determining if constitutional rights are clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity. See, e.g., Kalka v. Hawk
    Search
  50. cf. Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial