Case law

Wright v. Gibson

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 30, 2022

To determine whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, the Court considers: (1) whether the facts alleged by plaintiff establish a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) if so, whether that … right was clearly established at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.

Minchue v. Ivery

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Apr 28, 2025

Qualified Immunity as to Individual Capacity Claim Defendant Ivery asserts qualified immunity on Mr. Minchue’s excessive force claim against him. … Qualified immunity protects government officials from personal liability for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person [in their

Humes v. White County, Arkansas

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 11, 2023

Defendants argue that (1) it was not clearly established by prior precedent that Mr. … Defendants’ final qualified-immunity argument does give the Court considerable pause.32 They argue that it was not clearly established that a few days’ delay in treatment of an infected, watermelon-sized, oozing, and very

Harris v. City of Memphis, Tenn.

119 F. Supp. 2d 893 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 29, 2000

“It may be wise policy, as a matter of harmonious interstate relations, for States to accord each other immunity or to respect any established limits on liability. They are free to do so.” … County of Shelby, 640 S.W.2d 852, 854 (Tenn.App.1982) (noting that the doctrine of sovereign immunity “has been part of the common or case law of this state for a considerable period of time,” and that the TGTLA is “clearly

Barnes v. Green

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 14, 2021

In their Summary Judgment papers, Defendants focus solely on the first prong of the qualified immunity standard and apparently concede the “clearly established” prong. … Instead, “[a] more specific and particularized inquiry is necessary in order to assess clearly established law in the context of an assertion of qualified immunity.” Thurmond v.

Wyles v. Munn

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Feb 9, 2021

“Qualified immunity protects public officials from § 1983 damage actions if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … violated right was clearly established.”

Evans v. Smith

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Feb 6, 2024

Because courts cannot deny defendants qualified immunity unless both prongs of the analysis are resolved in the plaintiff’s favor, the Court will proceed to the “clearly established” prong. Watson v. … Thus, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity analysis. IV. CONCLUSION IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT: 1.

Hollonbeck v. Torrey

171 F.R.D. 244 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 17, 1997

must be filed by August 9, 1996, and that “[mjotions to amend pleadings ... shall be filed within 90 days of the issues being joined unless good cause is shown for delay.” ' Finally, any objection to the dates or deadlines established … Being an “owner” can mean possessing a fee interest (clearly inapplicable), being a tenant, lessee, or occupant (also seemingly inapplicable), or being a “person in control of the premises.” ACA 18-11-302.

Geddings v. Criner

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 14, 2025

Qualified immunity protects government officials from personal liability for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … To overcome the defense at the summary judgment stage, Geddings must demonstrate: “(1) a deprivation of a constitutional right, [that was] (2) … clearly established at the time of the deprivation.” Robbins v.

Johnson v. Boyd

676 F. Supp. 2d 800 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Dec 15, 2009

I.Qualified Immunity Finally, Defendants raise qualified immunity as a blanket defense, without making any attempt to tailor that argument to the specific facts surrounding each of Plaintiffs claims. See Saucier v. … Thus, Defendants have failed to establish that they are entitled to qualified immunity on any of Plaintiffs claims. III. Conclusion IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT: 1.

Johnson v. Daggett, Van Dover, Donovan & Perry, PLLC

99 F. Supp. 2d 1008 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 9, 2000

This defense is often referred to as “judgmental immunity.” … The court applied judgmental immunity.

Mayfield v. Gilliam

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jun 2, 2025

; and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.” … Defendant Gilliam is clearly entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. b.

Dunahue v. Reed

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Feb 26, 2025

Qualified immunity may protect a government official from liability when his or her conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … To determine if Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, the Court must conduct a two-pronged inquiry into whether Dunahue has demonstrated: “(1) a deprivation of a constitutional right, [that was] (2) . . . clearly

Dove v. Parham

176 F. Supp. 242 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Oct 8, 1959

The School Placement Law furnishes the legal machinery for an orderly administration of the public schools in a constitutional manner by the admission of qualified pupils upon a basis of individual merit without regard to … A reminder as to the duties of a school board intrusted with the implementation of the integration doctrine and administration of a pupil assignment law, clearly, at this point is in order.

Roper v. City of Pine Bluff

673 F. Supp. 329 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Nov 16, 1987

. § 19-1603(9), in that the promotion was not based upon an open competitive examination of efficiency, character and conduct, but upon an oral examination administered by the Civil Service Commission that failed to establish … immunity.

McCoy v. Blevins

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Feb 10, 2022

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … of a constitutional or statutory right; and (2) if so, was that right clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.

Clem v. Counts

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Oct 15, 2024

immunity. … Because the officers didn’t violate Clem’s clearly established constitutional rights, they’re entitled to qualified immunity. New, 787 F.3d at 899.

Walker v. Meadows

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jan 2, 2025

Qualified immunity protects government officials from § 1983 liability for damages if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … clearly established such that a reasonable official would not have known his or her actions were unlawful.

Dillard v. Arkansas Department of Correction

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 18, 2024

Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability when his conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009).2 “‘A clearly established 2Courts are “permitted to exercise their sound discretion in deciding which of the two prongs of the qualified immunity analysis should be addressed first

Pedraza v. Dill

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jun 17, 2025

Qualified immunity protects government officials from personal liability for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … To overcome the defense at the summary judgment stage, Pedraza must demonstrate: “(1) a deprivation of a constitutional right, [that was] (2) … clearly established at the time of the deprivation.”