About | Free Trial

Last Update

2012-04-13T00:00:00.000Z

This profile was last updated on . .

Is this you? Claim your profile.

Wrong Steven Armbruster?

Steven Armbruster

Police Officer

Kutztown University

HQ Phone: (610) 683-4000

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 of outstanding academic programs to prepare individuals for successful careers. more

Find other employees at this company (1,931)

Background Information

Employment History

Police Officer
Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education

Web References (11 Total 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.

Similar Profiles

Other People with this Name

Other people with the name Armbruster

Murat Armbruster
CoEfficient LLC

Greg Armbruster
RE/MAX LLC

Jan Armbruster
Jefferson Regional Medical Center

Ryan Armbruster
Elam & Burke P.A

Abbi Armbruster
Lakeside Christian Church

Browse ZoomInfo's Business Contact Directory by City

Browse ZoomInfo's
Business People Directory

Browse ZoomInfo's
Advanced Company Directory