Case law

LeClaire v. Dyer

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · May 31, 2023

for failure to state a claim as a matter of law, and (3) that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Officers are “entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless: (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at the time.”

Claudio v. Guthrie

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 7, 2025

Defendant Guthrie next contends he is entitled to qualified immunity. … In evaluating whether qualified immunity applies, the Court asks two questions: (1) whether the facts shown by the plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether the right was clearly established

Raper v. Maxwell

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 1, 2022

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known … that right was clearly established at the time of the defendant's alleged misconduct.”

Boston v. McCormick

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · May 7, 2021

Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability and the burdens of litigation unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right 3 The Court interprets … City of Minneapolis, the Eighth Circuit held that in order for a constitutional right to be clearly established for purposes of overcoming qualified immunity, case law must be established at the time of the alleged violation

Howard v. Fisk

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jan 30, 2020

Discussion In her Motion to Dismiss, Fisk argues she is entitled to sovereign immunity, absolute immunity, and qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government actors from personal liability under a Section 1983 claim Ainsofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

White v. Karimou

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 29, 2022

Clearly Established Right The above finding could end the Court’s qualified-immunity analysis. See Kulkay, 847 F.3d at 642. … White’s constitutional rights or that the implicated rights were clearly established at the time. Consequently, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Turner v. Otwell

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jun 7, 2024

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages when their “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … The Defendants “are entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to [Turner], establishes a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) the right was clearly

First National Bank of Fayetteville v. Smith

365 F. Supp. 898 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 1, 1973

Since the defendant’s decision is based upon the recommendation and views of the Deputy, it is clearly arbitrary if not capricious. … We are convinced that these orders were clearly wrong and therefore they are unenforceable.”

Bolger v. United States

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Feb 23, 2021

The Motion argues that Ranger Sullivan is entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established on August 20, 2017, that his conduct was a violation of Mr. … DISCUSSION The Government asks the Court to begin with the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis and find that it was not clearly established that Ranger Sullivan’s conduct violated Mr.

Williams v. Gulick

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Oct 11, 2024

Qualified immunity “shields [a] government official from liability in a section 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established right of which a reasonable person would have known.” Brown v. … As the claim did not state a constitutional violation, the Court need not address the second prong of qualified immunity to determine if the law was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

Wolfe v. Stephens

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 2, 2023

Clearly Established Qualified immunity does not apply where the conduct at issue violates clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … Because the rights allegedly violated were clearly established at the time of the arrest, qualified immunity will be denied. IV.

Handley v. City of Hope, Arkansas

137 F. Supp. 442 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Feb 1, 1956

It follows that defendant is entitled to governmental immunity and is not liable to the plaintiff herein. Plaintiff’s contention that the "swimming pool was an attractive nuisance is clearly without merit. … As a matter of fact, plaintiff’s claim clearly is one in tort, and he cannot, by attempting to designate the action as being "one in contract, avoid the effect of the rule granting immunity to municipalities in thé discharge

Bolin v. Wilkins

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 5, 2024

Bolin’s constitutional rights were violated during the pepper spray incident, he must still establish that such rights were clearly established at the time in order to defeat Deputy Loya’s claim of qualified immunity. … The Court acknowledges, however, that Deputy Wilkins still will be entitled to qualified immunity if it was not clearly established at the time that such a takedown would have violated Mr.

Ralston

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 17, 2026

Defendant argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity from Plaintiff’s individual- capacity claim. … The qualified immunity inquiry consists of two questions: “(1) whether the facts alleged or shown . . . establish a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) whether that constitutional right was clearly

Turner, Estate of v. Vernon Morris Sheriff

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · May 28, 2021

Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability and the burdens of litigation unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable … City of Minneapolis, the Eighth Circuit held that in order for a constitutional right to be clearly established for purposes of overcoming qualified immunity, case law must be established at the time of the alleged violation

Arnold v. McClinton

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 21, 2023

to qualified immunity.” … Defendant McClinton is nevertheless still entitled to qualified immunity, however, if the Court finds that, at the time of the shooting, the law was not clearly established. See Burbridge, 2 F.4th at 780.

Brown

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jan 21, 2026

or statutory right; and (2) whether the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.” … “Clearly Established” Right This conclusion, however, does not end the Court’s qualified immunity analysis.

Sanford v. Robinson

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Feb 14, 2025

Qualified Immunity Robinson argues he is entitled to qualified immunity regarding Sanford’s claims of false arrest and malicious prosecution and contends Sanford’s false … In evaluating whether qualified immunity applies, courts ask two questions: (1) whether the facts shown by the Plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether the right was clearly established

Riley

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 10, 2026

Qualified immunity “shields [a] government official[] from liability in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have … the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity regardless.

Gentry

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 20, 2026

Qualified immunity “shields [a] government [official] from liability in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would … It is Defendant Seiger’s burden to establish the predict facts warranting qualified immunity, and when genuine dispute of material facts exist on the record summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity is inappropriate