Case law

Howard v. Fisk

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 18, 2020

Thus, the Court must conclude that Fisk is entitled to qualified immunity and dismiss all individual capacity claims against her. See Estate of Walker v. … Wallace, 881 F.3d 1056, 1060 (8th Cir. 2018) (“An individual is entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”)

Levine v. City of Eureka Springs, Arkansas

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 29, 2017

Featherstone are each entitled to qualified immunity from Mr. Levine’s claims against them in their individual capacities. See Pearson v. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009) (“Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.”

Barrows v. Collins

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 15, 2019

Qualified Immunity The Court need not engage in a qualified-immunity analysis in this case, as it already found that none of Barrows’s claims amount to the deprivation of a constitutional right. … McNeese, 675 F.3d 1158, 1161 (8th Cir. 2012) (explaining that an official may be entitled to qualified immunity if the facts show that the plaintiff has been deprived of a constitutional right and that the right was clearly

Hubbard v. Stout

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Apr 23, 2018

Defendants are therefore not entitled to qualified immunity. Jones v. … Having found that the facts do not make out a constitutional violation, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. See, e.g., Krout v.

Walker v. Watson

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jun 6, 2022

Qualified Immunity The Defendants alternatively argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity with respect to Plaintiff’s claims. … The Court, having found that the facts do not make out a constitutional violation finds that the Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity with respect to each of Plaintiff’s constitutional claims.

Henson v. Foster

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Feb 10, 2023

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. … of whether the detainees rights were clearly established). 2.

Morgan v. Wilson

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 5, 2022

Judicial Immunity “Few doctrines were more solidly established at common law than the immunity of judges for liability for damages for acts committed within their judicial … entitled to qualified immunity).

Hurst v. Sikes

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 24, 2022

Defendants then contend they are entitled to qualified immunity on each of the claims. … Similarly, Deputy Sikes is not entitled to qualified immunity. Pace v.

Alberts v. Willis

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 18, 2020

Qualified Immunity “Government officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … For these reasons, qualified immunity is denied on this claim. IV.

McCaslin v. Wilkins

17 F. Supp. 2d 840 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jun 10, 1998

A court must measure the objective reasonableness of a Defendant’s conduct by reference to clearly established law. “No other ‘circumstances’ are relevant to the issue of qualified immunity.” Davis v. … that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.”

Williams v. Brown

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Apr 4, 2022

Defendant Gulick argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because Plaintiff has not stated a constitutional deprivation and, even assuming that he did, the implicated right was not clearly established. … Qualified immunity requires a two-pronged analysis: “whether the plaintiff has stated a plausible claim for violation of a constitutional or statutory right and whether the right was clearly established at the time of

Lyles v. City of Barling

17 F. Supp. 2d 848 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jun 26, 1998

A court must measure the objective reasonableness of a defendant’s conduct by reference to clearly established law. “No other ‘circumstances’ are relevant to the issue of qualified immunity.” Davis v. … that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.”

Pearson v. City of Paris

839 F. Supp. 645 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 2, 1993

Qualified Immunity- Defendant Ford’s final argument is that he is entitled to qualified immunity as a “government official performing discretionary functions.” … Once a court determines as a matter of law that a legal standard governing the governmental action at issue was clearly established, there' is no qualified immunity. Id.

Marley v. Crawford County, Arkansas

383 F. Supp. 2d 1129 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 12, 2005

Qualified immunity shields defendants “[f]rom liability for civil damages *1132 insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 204-07, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001) (qualified immunity does not shield conduct which violates clearly established rights; inquiry in determining whether a right is clearly established is

Chevallier v. Hand

884 F. Supp. 2d 807 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 6, 2012

Because an “in the presence” requirement for a warrantless police arrest on a misdemeanor offense is “far from clearly established,” according to the Eighth Circuit, the question of whether Defendant is entitled to qualified … If Defendant had probable cause to arrest, under the circumstances, his actions would receive qualified immunity. Veatch, 627 F.3d at 1259 .

Brown v. Gammage

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Apr 12, 2022

Qualified immunity requires a two-pronged analysis: “whether the plaintiff has stated a plausible claim for violation of a constitutional or statutory right and whether the right was clearly established at the time of … Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. Based on this finding, the Court need not determine whether an implicated right was clearly established at the time.

Braden ex rel. M v. Mountain Home School District

903 F. Supp. 2d 729 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Oct 18, 2012

Defendants assert the affirmative defense of qualified immunity with respect to Plaintiffs § 1983 claim. … “A state official sued in her individual capacity is entitled to qualified immunity so long as her conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known

Morris v. Crawford County, Ark.

173 F. Supp. 2d 870 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Oct 23, 2001

Deputy McAllister is not entitled to qualified immunity for the alleged use of excessive force, as Plaintiffs right to be free of such force was clearly established, that is Deputy McAllister could not have reasonably but … Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , -, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 2158, 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001) (qualified immunity does not shield conduct which violates clearly established rights; inquiry in determining whether a right is clearly established is

Villarreal

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · May 1, 2026

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity “shields [a] government official[] from liability in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory … Given these facts, as alleged by Plaintiff, the Court finds Fisherman distinguishable from the instant circumstances for the purpose of determining “clearly established” rights for qualified immunity purposes.

Nichols v. Chacon

110 F. Supp. 2d 1099 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 1, 2000

DISCUSSION Chacon has moved for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. … However, the court went on to hold the officer entitled to qualified immunity because the passenger’s right not to be arrested for making the gesture was not clearly established at the time of the arrest, January 14, 1996