The following excerpt is from A.D. v. Cal. Highway Patro, D.C. No. 3:07-cv-05483-SI, No. 09-16460, No. 09-17635 (9th Cir. 2013):
9. We also do not find it a "troubling issue" that, applying our holding, different results might be obtained when qualified immunity is raised as a post-verdict defense to both Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims in the same case. This is simply a feature of the differing nature of the constitutional claimsone with a subjective intent element and one without. Cf. Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 584-94 (1998) (rejecting a heightened pleading standard in cases alleging constitutional violations with a subjective intent element even though this might increase the number of subjective intent constitutional claims that would survive to summary judgment in qualified immunity cases).
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.