Case law

Henderson v. Fisher

631 F.2d 1115 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 20, 1980

The handling of evidence is clearly within the sweep of “initiating and presenting the State’s case”, and the prosecutor is immune from Section 1983 liability for such decisions. Imbler v. … Therefore, the prosecutorial act is protected from § 1983 liability by qualified, not absolute, immunity. Forsyth v. Kleindienst, 599 F.2d 1203, 1211-16 (3d Cir. 1979). 16.

Dotzel v. Ashbridge

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 14, 2006

Leavy, 322 F.3d 776, 785 (3d Cir. 2003). 6 have read the Court’s decisions to mean that “an order denying qualified or absolute immunity, to the extent that the order turns on an issue of … Most executive officers, by contrast, are entitled to only qualified immunity, under which they can be sued for acts which are clearly illegal – in other words, which a reasonable officer would have known were illegal.

Arthur Diamond v. Pennsylvania State Education A

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 28, 2020

In only one context has the Court invented a freestanding defense: the qualified immunity of certain state officials. … The Fifth Circuit affirmed, finding the defendants entitled to qualified immunity. Wyatt v.

Arthur Diamond v. Pennsylvania State Education A

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 28, 2020

In only one context has the Court invented a freestanding defense: the qualified immunity of certain state officials. … The Fifth Circuit affirmed, finding the defendants entitled to qualified immunity. Wyatt v.

A.W. v. Jersey City Public Schools

341 F.3d 234 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 19, 2003

It is well established that “[a] State may effectuate a waiver of its constitutional immunity by a state statute or constitutional provision, or by otherwise waiving its immunity to suit in the context of a particular federal … It held that the IDEA successfully eliminated this immunity under the Fourteenth Amendment and, alternatively, that section 1403 clearly conditions receipt of IDEA funding on a state’s consent to waive its immunity.

Revell v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey

598 F.3d 128 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 22, 2010

They also argued that Erickson was entitled to qualified immunity. … immunity.

Katrina Parker v. New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 24, 2025

Georgia, 546 U.S. 151, 159 (2006) (setting forth a three-part test for evaluating whether Title II abrogates Eleventh Amendment immunity); Geness v. Admin. Off. of Pa. … Clearly, such a result was not intended by Congress.” (quoting 45 C.F.R. pt. 84, App. A, p. 405 (1978))).

In Re: Hechinger Investment Company of Delaware, Inc., Debtor Baltimore County, Maryland Montgomery County, Maryland Prince George's County, Maryland State of Maryland v. Hechinger Liquidation Trust Patricia A. Staiano, Trustee State of Maryland, Baltimore County, Maryland, Montgomery County, Maryland, and Prince George's County, Maryland

335 F.3d 243 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 18, 2003

Hilton, 618 F.2d 232 , 241 n. 7 (3d Cir.1980) (noting the paradox inherent in the fact that "it is clearly established that the state's [sovereign] immunity can be waived by the state, despite the principle that a waiver … That reading would make no sense and is clearly incorrect.

Mobilfone of Northeastern Pennsylvania, Inc. v. Commonwealth Telephone Company

571 F.2d 141 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 8, 1978

The Parker rule holds that certain state action is immune from the Sherman Act’s proscriptions. … In Bates, however, “Parker -type immunity” was found to apply in a challenge to a state court’s ban on lawyer advertising.

Jones v. Brown

461 F.3d 353 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 24, 2006

immunity. … State officials are entitled to qualified immunity from damage liability if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Estate of Bailey ex rel. Oare v. County of York

768 F.2d 503 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 27, 1985

Although the court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint, it did so on the basis of qualified immunity. Jensen v. … Holt, 105 S.Ct. at 878-79 (holding that a municipality is not entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 for actions by its agents taken in their official capacity).

Federal Insurance v. Richard I. Rubin & Co.

12 F.3d 1270 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 28, 1993

Mitchell, 472 U.S. at 527 , 105 S.Ct. at 2816 (“qualified immunity is' in part an entitlement not to be 'forced to litigate”); see also United States v. … Once the foreign state has produced [ ] prima facie evidence of immunity, the burden of going forward [ ] shift[s] to the plaintiff to produce evidence establishing that the foreign state is not entitled to immunity.

Bright v. Westmoreland County

443 F.3d 276 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 4, 2006

This theory of liability based solely on a failure of the state to act is clearly foreclosed by DeShaney . … Local agencies are given broad immunity in 42 Pa. Cons.Stat. § 8541 which is qualified by eight exceptions that do not apply to this case.

Dr. Joseph T. Skehan v. Board of Trustees of Bloomsburg State College

538 F.2d 53 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 13, 1976

Rhodes recognized a qualified immunity for governmental officials generally. … a qualified immunity.

Paula Maliandi v. Montclair State University

845 F.3d 77 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 27, 2016

of the State for purposes of Eleventh Amendment immunity and hence qualified as a “person” subject to liability for discrimination claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the NJLAD. … This fact clearly weighs in favor of immunity. See Fitchik, 873 F.2d at 663. Eminent Domain. State colleges have the power of eminent domain. N.J. Stat. Ann. § 18A:64-6(l).

United States v. Wayne James

888 F.3d 42 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 23, 2018

Since James is asserting this legislative privilege, “the burden of establishing the applicability of legislative immunity, by a preponderance of the evidence, rests with him.” Gov’t of Virgin Islands v. … But although James’ purchasing of Fireburn documents could qualify as informal fact- finding, the indictment is not concerned with such conduct.

In Re: Cendant Corporation Securities Litigation Ernst & Young LLP

343 F.3d 658 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 16, 2003

Courts have wrestled with the idea of affording opinion work product absolute immunity from discovery. … McGraw gave to Wood during a private consultation with Wood’s attorney clearly calls for attorney work product protection. In retaining Dr.

United States v. Sargent Electric Co., Lord Electric Co., Inc., W v. Pangborne and Co., Inc., J.A. Bruce Pinney

785 F.2d 1123 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 18, 1986

These bidders were qualified by Gulf to submit bids for work at the facility. Of these, only Pangborne, Ortlip Co., and The Foley Co. were on the Fairless Hills qualified list. … Sargent and Lord were on the qualified list at Fairless Hills, but neither Lord nor Sargent nor Fishbach and Moore were qualified at Gulf.

Tedford v. Hepting

990 F.2d 745 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 31, 1993

The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on the grounds of absolute and qualified immunity, and also filed a motion to stay all further proceedings until after the criminal appeal was decided. … ANALYSIS OF PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS Throughout the proceedings in the district court, plaintiff was acting pro se, 2 but his pleadings clearly disclose the nature of his claims, and the relief he seeks.

Gardner v. Bangerter

46 F.3d 1151 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 12, 1995

Even if we assume that the Defendants were performing a discretionary rather than ministerial function in signing and enforcing a law, it is unmistakably clear that the Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because … The Appellants have not even come close to carrying their burden of convincing the court that the Defendants violated a clearly established constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known. Hilliard v.