The following excerpt is from Estrada v. Cal. Corr. Inst., Case No.: 1:18-cv-00599-AWI-SAB (PC) (E.D. Cal. 2020):
"Thus, the plaintiff is entitled to all reasonable inferences from the facts alleged, not only those that support his claim, but also those that defeat the immunity defense." McKenna v. Wright, 386 F.3d 432, 436 (2d Cir. 2004). "If the operative complaint 'contains even one allegation of a harmful act that would constitute a violation of a clearly established constitutional right,' then plaintiff[ is] 'entitled to go forward' with [his] claims." Keates, 883 F.3d at 1235 (citation omitted).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.