Oral Arguments are happening now. View them on the web or via Mobile App on iPhone / iPad or Android (4.0+).

You are here

Potter v. Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version
Date: 
Friday, January 10, 2014

S-13-0544, Paul D. Potter (Appellant) v. Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska and Terry Bockstadter and Robert Losee, in their individual capacities (Appellees).

Lancaster County, Judge Stephanie F. Stacy

Attorneys:       Abby Osborn (Appellant) (ShifferMiller Law Office, P.C., L.L.O.) --- John C. Wiltse (Appellees) (University of Nebraska General Counsel) and David R. Buntain (Appellees) (Cline, Williams, Wright, Johnson & Oldfather, LLP).

Civil:   Due Process Rights, § 1983

Proceedings Below:    The district court found no genuine issue of material fact and granted summary judgment to the Appellees.  As relevant here, the court concluded that the individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because Potter failed to allege facts sufficient to establish a violation of a constitutional right and, even assuming his allegations were sufficient, Potter failed to show that the right was clearly established.

Issues on Appeal:        Potter assigns that the district court erred in concluding that (1) there was no genuine issue of material fact that Potter had not sufficiently suffered a constitutional violation; and (2) Potter’s alleged right was not clearly established at the time.

This page was last modified on Monday, January 13, 2014