STEPHEN MATTHEW HOPKINS and JULIE R. HOPKINS v. ANTHONY (TONY) NICHOLS and WILLIAM (BILLY) LAMB, in their individual and official capacities - Articles

All Content

STEPHEN MATTHEW HOPKINS and JULIE R. HOPKINS v. ANTHONY (TONY) NICHOLS and WILLIAM (BILLY) LAMB, in their individual and official capacities

Posted by: Stacey Shrader Joslin on Jun 16, 2022

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Robyn Beale Williams, FARRAR & BATES, LLP, Brentwood, Tennessee, for Appellants.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Kyle Mothershead, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellees.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Robyn Beale Williams, FARRAR & BATES, LLP, Brentwood, Tennessee, for Appellants.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Kyle Mothershead, Nashville, Tennessee, Frank Brazil, Wesley Clark, BRAZIL CLARK, LLC, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellees.

Judge(s): SUTTON, Chief Judge; GIBBONS and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee at Columbia

GRIFFIN, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs Stephen Matthew and Julie Hopkins kept cattle on a farm in Tennessee. Suspecting animal cruelty, Marshall County Detective Anthony Nichols searched the farm. He and Sheriff William Lamb later seized the cattle without a warrant. Plaintiffs brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Nichols and Lamb violated their Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The district court denied defendants qualified immunity as to those claims, which they now appeal. We affirm.

Attachments: