Hart v. O'Brien
Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.
Status
More on how this was screened
Spivey v. Robertson held that the later Supreme Court decision in Kalina v. Fletcher displaced that timing rule. All 35 flagged citations were read. Later courts continue to use Hart's separate rules on qualified immunity, warrant affidavits, and appellate review.
35 later cases cite Hart v. O'Brien; 35 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.
Relying on Hart v. O'Brien?
This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.
Treatments
Abrogated
-
The Fifth Circuit held that Kalina displaced Hart's categorical rule against absolute prosecutorial immunity before charges are filed.
Spivey v. Robertson · Fifth Circuit · filed
Kalina now governs when absolute immunity may apply, thus the district court erred in applying Hart’s chronological analysis to the facts of the instant case. Hart is no longer valid law regarding the threshold timing for absolute immunity.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
Does this case still carry your argument?
Describe your facts. Ezel reads Hart v. O'Brien and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace