Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
9,632 results
0.77s
John Balsewicz v. Jonathan Pawlyk
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 2, 2020
of whether Sergeant Pawlyk is entitled to qualified immunity. … And Sergeant Pawlyk’s conduct—as alleged and supported by Balsewicz—violated a clearly established right. So, Sergeant Pawlyk is not entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesPublishedCharles Quilico v. Sidney J. Kaplan and Samuel Solomon
749 F.2d 480 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 14, 1984
congressional intent and the statutory scheme of Chapter 73 of Title 38 establishing the Department of Medicine and Surgery. … Since a grant of immunity under section 4116 to physicians and surgeons employed on a temporary basis for a fixed period of time under section 4114 furthers the section 4114 goal of improving the recruitment of the most qualified
Cited 38 timesPublishedMarks, Alvin v. Carmody, Larry
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 12, 2000
As the district court recognized, qualified immunity protects arresting police officers from suit if a reasonable officer would have believed the arrest to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information … The district court’s judgment dismissing the case against them on qualified immunity grounds is therefore Affirmed.
Cited 0 timesPublished2 F. App'x 528 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 6, 2001
The district court granted Muensterman’s motion to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds and Shea appeals. We affirm. … The district court dismissed Shea’s complaint, holding that Muensterman was entitled to qualified immunity because probable cause for the arrest existed.
Cited 7 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 14, 2018
Sangamon County, 705 F.3d 706, 723–24 (7th Cir. 2013) (a plaintiff can show that law is clearly established and defeat qualified immunity “either by identifying a closely analogous case or by persuading the court … It is well‐settled, clearly established law that such a failure con‐ stitutes deliberate indifference. See id. at 484–85 (rejecting a qualified immunity defense).
Cited 0 timesPublished5 F. App'x 479 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 23, 2001
Qualified immunity protects government officials whose conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … As for the second step, these rights were clearly established at the time the violation occurred. See, e.g., Rakovich v.
Cited 4 timesPublishedDerek Burton v. Michael Downey
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 8, 2015
immunity because their actions were consistent with clearly established law. … right, and (2) wheth‐ er that constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”
Cited 0 timesPublishedGary Hicks v. Illinois Department of Corrections
109 F.4th 895 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 23, 2024
Alternatively, the court held, qualified immunity shielded Defendants from the First Amendment challenge be- cause clearly established law does not provide the right to share such posts publicly while identifying oneself … The district court granted summary judgment to Defendants on the Fourteenth Amendment due process claim on qualified immunity grounds, explaining that the law does not clearly establish that the Department’s stand- ards were
Cited 13 timesPublished409 F. App'x 15 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 21, 2011
to give a Miranda warning was not clearly established as a constitutional violation” at the time the interviews took place. … On appeal Hoeft challenges only the district court’s conclusion that failure to give a Miranda warning wasn’t a clearly established constitutional violation at the time of the two interviews.
Cited 5 timesPublished894 F.2d 949 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 6, 1990
The district court denied the qualified immunity defenses of Cox and Scroggins because it found that their actions may well have violated Burns’ clearly established constitutional rights. … With that in mind, it is entirely likely that if prosecutors were granted only qualified immunity from suits for conduct relating to their role as the officers’ legal advisor, the end result would be to discourage prosecutors
Cited 9 timesPublishedNathson Fields v. Lawrence Wharrie
672 F.3d 505 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 28, 2012
If a prosecutor plants evidence before someone is arrested, he enjoys only qualified immunity. … The officers would receive only qualified immunity, though the prosecutor would be absolutely immune from suit. Id.
Cited 104 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 14, 2018
Sangamon County, 705 F.3d 706, 723–24 (7th Cir. 2013) (a plaintiff can show that law is clearly established and defeat qualified immunity “either by identifying a closely analogous case or by persuading the court … It is well‐settled, clearly established law that such a failure con‐ stitutes deliberate indifference. See id. at 484–85 (rejecting a qualified immunity defense).
Cited 0 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 14, 2018
Sangamon County, 705 F.3d 706, 723–24 (7th Cir. 2013) (a plaintiff can show that law is clearly established and defeat qualified immunity “either by identifying a closely analogous case or by persuading the court … It is well‐settled, clearly established law that such a failure con‐ stitutes deliberate indifference. See id. at 484–85 (rejecting a qualified immunity defense).
Cited 0 timesPublishedBillings v. Madison Metro. School Dist
259 F.3d 807 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 2, 2001
a court can determine if it was clearly established." … Zabel is entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDaniel L. Jennings v. Illinois Office of Education
589 F.2d 935 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 4, 1979
or implied) or a clearly expressed congressional intention to abrogate the states’ immunity. … Court stressed its reluctance to hold states amenable to such suits, it was being asked to expand judicially created exceptions to the doctrine of state immunity rather than, as here, to enforce a clearly articulated congressional
Cited 28 timesPublished790 F.2d 44 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 5, 1986
In section 1983 actions, public prosecutors, such as state’s attorneys, enjoy “a qualified immunity when performing administrative or investigatory duties, but an absolute immunity when performing a quasi-judicial role.” … If a government official’s function was quasi-judicial, the official enjoys absolute immunity. If the function was administrative or investigatory, the official enjoys only qualified immunity.
Cited 31 timesPublishedChauncey L. Moore, Jr. v. The Marketplace Restaurant, Inc.
754 F.2d 1336 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 11, 1985
The Supreme Court spoke exclusively in terms of “clearly established” law. … clearly established at the time of the incident in question.
Cited 286 timesPublishedTyquan Stewart v. Parkview Hospital
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 22, 2019
Police officers enjoy immunity from liability for conduct that “does not violate clearly established statutory or consti‐ tutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Kisela v. Hughes, 138 S. … In these circumstances, Stewart cannot establish that the officers violated a right clearly established under the Fourth Amendment, and qualified immunity ap‐ plies. Id.; see also Wilson v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 8, 2011
The Rights Were Clearly Established To decide qualified immunity, we turn next to whether the alleged rights were clearly established. … established as to defeat qualified immunity. 8-8-11
Cited 0 timesPublished922 F.2d 370 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 7, 1991
The alleged violations are neither of such caliber as to rise to the level of constitutional violations nor are they so clearly established as to remove qualified immunity. 10 The free exercise clause of the first amendment … As such, the alleged violation has not been so “clearly established” at the time of the conduct as to remove defendants’ qualified immunity. See Harlow v.
Cited 74 timesPublished
Ask Donna