Share This Profile
Share this profile on Facebook.
Link to this profile on LinkedIn.
Tweet this profile on Twitter.
Email a link to this profile.
See other services through which you can share this profile.
This profile was last updated on 4/13/12  and contains information from public web pages.

Steven Armbruster

Wrong Steven Armbruster?

Police Officer

Phone: (610) ***-****  HQ Phone
Kutztown University
15200 Kutztown Road
Kutztown , Pennsylvania 19530
United States

Company Description: Comprising four colleges - Business, Education, Liberal Arts and Sciences and Visual and Performing Arts - Kutztown University of Pennsylvania offers a wide range...   more
Background

Employment History

11 Total References
Web References
The Police Law Blog: Laws and Regulations
www.policelawblog.com [cached]
Steve Armbruster, a Kutztown University police officer filed an appeal from an adverse decision by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, in Armbruster v. Cavanaugh, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22288 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 9, 2010) regarding his claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against university officials and the police chief of his department on the basis of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. 
The case essentially involved a student protest where the individual students had engaged in a peaceful protest, and counter-protest where the students involved had followed officer requests to move away from university buildings.  Subsequently, some students got upset at the political issues being debated and complained to university personnel.
As a result, the university president requested that Officer Armbruster to "push" the protesters off campus.  Officer Armbruster did not respond to the university president's request to do so and the request then went to the Chief of Police.  The Chief of Police for the department then observed the situation and ordered Officer Armbruster, again, to push the protesters off campus because of his perception that they were engaged in disorderly conduct. 
In the officer's view, the protesters had not been acting in a disorderly manner and objected to the Chief's orders, claiming that they would violate the civil rights of the protesters and might subject himself to personal liability.  The Chief of Police then relieved Officer Armbruster of his duties and eventually placed him on administrative leave.  Finally, Officer Armbruster was given a 5-day suspension as a result of the objections he lodged. 
Officer Armbruster then filed suit alleging that he had been subject to violations by the department of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.  The U.S. District Court, after hearing the claims, dismissed them, causing the appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. 
LEGAL ISSUES
In the appeal, Officer Armbruster conceded his first claim, based on the First Amendment, but had appealed the dismissal of his claims under the Fourteenth Amendment.  This claim by Officer Armbruster had alleged a violation of his right to refuse to obey an unconstitutional order after he was ordered to arrest or threaten to arrest demonstrators for disorderly conduct.
The Police Law Blog: Section 1983 Defense for Officers
www.policelawblog.com [cached]
Steve Armbruster, a Kutztown University police officer filed an appeal from an adverse decision by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, in Armbruster v. Cavanaugh, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22288 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 9, 2010) regarding his claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against university officials and the police chief of his department on the basis of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. 
The case essentially involved a student protest where the individual students had engaged in a peaceful protest, and counter-protest where the students involved had followed officer requests to move away from university buildings.  Subsequently, some students got upset at the political issues being debated and complained to university personnel.
As a result, the university president requested that Officer Armbruster to "push" the protesters off campus.  Officer Armbruster did not respond to the university president's request to do so and the request then went to the Chief of Police.  The Chief of Police for the department then observed the situation and ordered Officer Armbruster, again, to push the protesters off campus because of his perception that they were engaged in disorderly conduct. 
In the officer's view, the protesters had not been acting in a disorderly manner and objected to the Chief's orders, claiming that they would violate the civil rights of the protesters and might subject himself to personal liability.  The Chief of Police then relieved Officer Armbruster of his duties and eventually placed him on administrative leave.  Finally, Officer Armbruster was given a 5-day suspension as a result of the objections he lodged. 
Officer Armbruster then filed suit alleging that he had been subject to violations by the department of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.  The U.S. District Court, after hearing the claims, dismissed them, causing the appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. 
LEGAL ISSUES
In the appeal, Officer Armbruster conceded his first claim, based on the First Amendment, but had appealed the dismissal of his claims under the Fourteenth Amendment.  This claim by Officer Armbruster had alleged a violation of his right to refuse to obey an unconstitutional order after he was ordered to arrest or threaten to arrest demonstrators for disorderly conduct.
Police Officer’s Section 1983 Claims Dismissed by the Third Circuit - The Police Law Blog
www.policelawblog.com [cached]
Steve Armbruster, a Kutztown University police officer filed an appeal from an adverse decision by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, in Armbruster v. Cavanaugh, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22288 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 9, 2010) regarding his claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against university officials and the police chief of his department on the basis of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. 
The case essentially involved a student protest where the individual students had engaged in a peaceful protest, and counter-protest where the students involved had followed officer requests to move away from university buildings.  Subsequently, some students got upset at the political issues being debated and complained to university personnel.
As a result, the university president requested that Officer Armbruster to "push" the protesters off campus.  Officer Armbruster did not respond to the university president's request to do so and the request then went to the Chief of Police.  The Chief of Police for the department then observed the situation and ordered Officer Armbruster, again, to push the protesters off campus because of his perception that they were engaged in disorderly conduct. 
In the officer's view, the protesters had not been acting in a disorderly manner and objected to the Chief's orders, claiming that they would violate the civil rights of the protesters and might subject himself to personal liability.  The Chief of Police then relieved Officer Armbruster of his duties and eventually placed him on administrative leave.  Finally, Officer Armbruster was given a 5-day suspension as a result of the objections he lodged. 
Officer Armbruster then filed suit alleging that he had been subject to violations by the department of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.  The U.S. District Court, after hearing the claims, dismissed them, causing the appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. 
LEGAL ISSUES
In the appeal, Officer Armbruster conceded his first claim, based on the First Amendment, but had appealed the dismissal of his claims under the Fourteenth Amendment.  This claim by Officer Armbruster had alleged a violation of his right to refuse to obey an unconstitutional order after he was ordered to arrest or threaten to arrest demonstrators for disorderly conduct.
The Police Law Blog
www.policelawblog.com [cached]
Steve Armbruster, a Kutztown University police officer filed an appeal from an adverse decision by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, in Armbruster v. Cavanaugh, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22288 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 9, 2010) regarding his claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against university officials and the police chief of his department on the basis of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. 
The case essentially involved a student protest where the individual students had engaged in a peaceful protest, and counter-protest where the students involved had followed officer requests to move away from university buildings.  Subsequently, some students got upset at the political issues being debated and complained to university personnel.
As a result, the university president requested that Officer Armbruster to "push" the protesters off campus.  Officer Armbruster did not respond to the university president's request to do so and the request then went to the Chief of Police.  The Chief of Police for the department then observed the situation and ordered Officer Armbruster, again, to push the protesters off campus because of his perception that they were engaged in disorderly conduct. 
In the officer's view, the protesters had not been acting in a disorderly manner and objected to the Chief's orders, claiming that they would violate the civil rights of the protesters and might subject himself to personal liability.  The Chief of Police then relieved Officer Armbruster of his duties and eventually placed him on administrative leave.  Finally, Officer Armbruster was given a 5-day suspension as a result of the objections he lodged. 
Officer Armbruster then filed suit alleging that he had been subject to violations by the department of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.  The U.S. District Court, after hearing the claims, dismissed them, causing the appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. 
LEGAL ISSUES
In the appeal, Officer Armbruster conceded his first claim, based on the First Amendment, but had appealed the dismissal of his claims under the Fourteenth Amendment.  This claim by Officer Armbruster had alleged a violation of his right to refuse to obey an unconstitutional order after he was ordered to arrest or threaten to arrest demonstrators for disorderly conduct.
The Police Law Blog
www.policelawblog.com [cached]
Steve Armbruster, a Kutztown University police officer filed an appeal from an adverse decision by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, in Armbruster v. Cavanaugh, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22288 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 9, 2010) regarding his claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against university officials and the police chief of his department on the basis of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. 
The case essentially involved a student protest where the individual students had engaged in a peaceful protest, and counter-protest where the students involved had followed officer requests to move away from university buildings.  Subsequently, some students got upset at the political issues being debated and complained to university personnel.
As a result, the university president requested that Officer Armbruster to "push" the protesters off campus.  Officer Armbruster did not respond to the university president's request to do so and the request then went to the Chief of Police.  The Chief of Police for the department then observed the situation and ordered Officer Armbruster, again, to push the protesters off campus because of his perception that they were engaged in disorderly conduct. 
In the officer's view, the protesters had not been acting in a disorderly manner and objected to the Chief's orders, claiming that they would violate the civil rights of the protesters and might subject himself to personal liability.  The Chief of Police then relieved Officer Armbruster of his duties and eventually placed him on administrative leave.  Finally, Officer Armbruster was given a 5-day suspension as a result of the objections he lodged. 
Officer Armbruster then filed suit alleging that he had been subject to violations by the department of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.  The U.S. District Court, after hearing the claims, dismissed them, causing the appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. 
LEGAL ISSUES
In the appeal, Officer Armbruster conceded his first claim, based on the First Amendment, but had appealed the dismissal of his claims under the Fourteenth Amendment.  This claim by Officer Armbruster had alleged a violation of his right to refuse to obey an unconstitutional order after he was ordered to arrest or threaten to arrest demonstrators for disorderly conduct.
Other People with the name "Armbruster":
Other ZoomInfo Searches
Accelerate your business with the industry's most comprehensive profiles on business people and companies.
Find business contacts by city, industry and title. Our B2B directory has just-verified and in-depth profiles, plus the market's top tools for searching, targeting and tracking.
Atlanta | Boston | Chicago | Houston | Los Angeles | New York
Browse ZoomInfo's business people directory. Our professional profiles include verified contact information, biography, work history, affiliations and more.
Browse ZoomInfo's company directory. Our company profiles include corporate background information, detailed descriptions, and links to comprehensive employee profiles with verified contact information.