Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,306 results
1.44s
District Court, E.D. California · Jan 3, 2025
Qualified immunity shields “government 12 officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly 13 established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … See Felarca, 891 F.3d 809, 816 (“A plaintiff must prove both steps of the 28 [qualified immunity analysis] to establish the officials are not entitled to immunity.”). 1 pursuant to Monell v. Dep’t of Soc.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · May 12, 2026
Qualified Immunity 28 Defendants move for qualified immunity as to Plaintiff’s first Section 1983 cause 1 of action on the grounds that the FAC fails to establish an excessive force … “The doctrine of 4 qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as 5 their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of 6 which a reasonable
Cited 0 timesUnknownCharlene Stith v. Greg Rodriguez, Michael Pallares
District Court, E.D. California · Sep 25, 2025
the right of prisoners to be free from sexual assault is 6 clearly established. … Qualified Immunity 25 Defendants argue Pallares is entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiff’s claims. (Doc. 26 No. 27-1 at 9-10).
Cited 0 timesUnknownMunoz v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
District Court, E.D. California · Jan 20, 2022
Qualified immunity is “immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to 26 liability.” Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985). … Aug. 9, 2000) 24 (observing that “the obligation of California prison officials to comply with the ADA was clearly 25 established”). Defendants fail to show they are entitled to qualified immunity. 26 V.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Feb 10, 2023
Qualified Immunity 15 “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for 16 civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … right; 21 and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time of the officer’s alleged 22 misconduct.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jul 17, 2020
immunity analysis. 12 Turning to the second prong, the court notes that clearly established law must be 13 defined with a “high ‘degree of specificity.’” … entitled to qualified immunity. 7 Nicholson v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · May 17, 2024
Id. at 9. 3 Legal Standard for Qualified Immunity 4 “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil 5 damages insofar as their conduct … Immunity 20 Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Apr 18, 2024
were found to constitute judicial deception, 20 defendants would still be entitled to qualified immunity on 21 plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment claim unless plaintiffs could 22 establish … Callahan, 555 26 U.S. 223, 232 (2009) (“Qualified immunity is applicable unless 27 the official’s conduct violated a clearly established 28 constitutional right.”); Saucier v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Nov 20, 2023
Second and Third Affirmative Defenses: Qualified Immunity 24 As her second affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that because she “did not deprive 25 Plaintiff of any clearly established right, privilege, or … The fact that Defendant ultimately bears the 11 burden of establishing qualified immunity does not warrant striking the affirmative defense under
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PC) Jackson v. Soltanian Zadeh
District Court, E.D. California · Jan 31, 2020
“Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages unless their 18 conduct violates ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable 19 person would have known.’” … a statutory or constitutional right; 23 and (2) whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the incident.
Cited 0 timesUnknown859 F. Supp. 2d 1154 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 19, 2012
Williams qualifies for the latter. The gate of one lane is thus opened, and 2254(d) poses no further obstacle to Williams developing his claim in federal court. 2. … [Counsel]’s failure to interview these witnesses, given the circumstances of the case, was clearly incompetent.”).
Cited 9 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Sep 23, 2025
He also argues that defendant is not entitled to 7 qualified immunity. Id. at 6. 8 C. … Qualified Immunity 22 “[G]overnment officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from 23 liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PC) Brown v. Director of Corrections
District Court, E.D. California · Feb 9, 2024
Legal Standards 13 Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages unless their conduct 14 violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. … Ramirez–Palmer, 25 301 F.3d 1043, 1053 (9th Cir. 2002). 26 “For the second step in the qualified immunity analysis—whether the constitutional right 27 was clearly established at
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Nov 20, 2024
QUALIFIED IMMUNITY 24 A. … Legal Standards 25 “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil 26 damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jun 23, 2020
Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine enforced by courts, and defendants have no authority to provide or deny qualified immunity. … MOTION AGAINST QUALIFIED IMMUNITY 16 No defendant has been served in this action yet. And no defendant has invoked qualified 17 | immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Aug 12, 2021
Qualified Immunity 11 Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages unless their 12 conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional … Ordinarily, once the court 7 concludes that a right was clearly established, an officer is not entitled to qualified immunity 8 because a reasonably competent public official is charged with knowing the law governing
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 13, 2023
He also argues that this 17 dispute precludes qualified immunity because if Guerra saw and ignored the attack, the 18 unlawfulness of his conduct was clearly established. Id. at 13. 19 B. … This disputed fact therefore precludes qualified immunity for 7 defendant Guerra.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 17, 2025
violate clearly established statutory or 26 constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … statutory or constitutional right; and (2) 2 whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the incident.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Feb 1, 2022
It is a defendants’ burden to establish that they are entitled to qualified immunity. 10 Moreno v. … Ct. 1148, 1152 (2018) (“Qualified immunity 27 attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional 28 rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 23, 2021
Qualified Immunity 11 Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages unless their 12 conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … However, even if the plaintiff 10 has alleged a violation of a clearly established right, the government official is entitled to 11 qualified immunity if he could have “. . . reasonably but mistakenly believed that
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna