Case law

Villagrana v. Kernan

District Court, N.D. California · Jun 12, 2025

immunity grounds. … Under Ninth Circuit law, qualified immunity is not 4 available to private defendants in a section 1983 suit. Danielson v.

Sepatis v. City and County of San Francisco

217 F. Supp. 2d 992 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 15, 2002

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields public officials from liability for civil damages so long as their conduct does “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … clearly established at the time of the violation.

Scocca v. Smith

912 F. Supp. 2d 875 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 17, 2012

This' is because, for qualified immunity, the Court must consider what the clearly established law was at the time of the sheriffs decision to deny Mr. Scocca’s application for a CCW license. … “Clearly established” for purposes of qualified immunity means that “the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official' would understand that what he is doing violates that right.

Bolbol v. City of Daly City

754 F. Supp. 2d 1095 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 17, 2010

right was clearly established. 1. … to qualified immunity.

Ciampi v. City of Palo Alto

790 F. Supp. 2d 1077 · District Court, N.D. California · May 11, 2011

Qualified Immunity Doctrine The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … The immunity inquiry, on the other hand, asks whether the right Plaintiff claims was clearly established. Id.

Sythe v. City of Eureka

78 F. Supp. 2d 1050 · District Court, N.D. California · Jan 28, 2000

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY AND FALSE ARREST Government officials performing their discretionary duties are entitled to qualified immunity unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … ANALYSIS For this Court to find qualified immunity for the individual officers in the case at bar, it must reach two conclusions: First, that the law governing the officers’ conduct was clearly established; and second, under

Cockcroft v. Kirkland

548 F. Supp. 2d 767 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 10, 2008

Qualified Immunity. … The defense of qualified immunity protects “government officials ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Lopez

District Court, N.D. California · Dec 11, 2025

That 19 conclusion means that the police officers are entitled to qualified immunity. 20 In determining whether an officer has qualified immunity, courts consider (1) whether the 21 officer violated a constitutional … immunity.”

Flynn v. City of Santa Clara

388 F. Supp. 3d 1158 · District Court, N.D. California · May 22, 2019

However, viewpoint discrimination is barred under clearly established First Amendment law. … Alcarez but, even if not, at the very least, qualified immunity protects the individual officers as there was no clearly established law holding that defense of others is a legal defense to a § 148(a)(1) violation. III.

Hansen v. California Department of Corrections

920 F. Supp. 1480 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 25, 1996

If, rationally, what the state of the law was is a close question, the law cannot be deemed “clearly established” for purposes of qualified immunity. … California Statutory Immunity California has no qualified immunity law similar to federal qualified immunity.

Johnson v. Bay Area Rapid Transit

790 F. Supp. 2d 1034 · District Court, N.D. California · May 10, 2011

The court, however, granted qualified immunity to MacPherson, stating that as of 2005, it was not clearly established that such use was unconstitutional. Id. at 833 . … Nor is Gee entitled to qualified immunity. The law as to extended detentions absent the indicia of probable cause was clearly established at the time of the incident.

OONA R.-S. BY KATE S. v. Santa Rosa City Schools

890 F. Supp. 1452 · District Court, N.D. California · May 2, 1995

If the plaintiff does establish such intent, there can be no qualified immunity. … In order to defeat a qualified immunity claim at this stage in a section 1983 action, a plaintiff must sufficiently allege the deprivation of a clearly established right secured by federal statutory or constitutional law.

Hepting v. AT & T Corp.

439 F. Supp. 2d 974 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 20, 2006

Qualified immunity shields state actors from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … are not clearly established and deny them qualified immunity when they violate statutory rights that similarly are not clearly established.”); accord Tapley, 211 F.3d at 1216.

Manzanillo v. Lewis

267 F. Supp. 3d 1261 · District Court, N.D. California · Jan 12, 2017

A court considering a claim of qualified immunity must determine whether -the plaintiff has. alleged the deprivation of an actual constitutional right and whether such right was “clearly established.” Pearson v. … Qualified Immunity Defendants Lewis, Hallock, Wood, and McGuyer also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Tungwarara v. United States

400 F. Supp. 2d 1213 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 13, 2005

The defense of qualified immunity protects “government officials ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … On the uncontested facts of the search here, however, Ludwigs is entitled to qualified immunity. C. Plaintiffs Fifth Amendment Right To Equal Protection Was Not Clearly Established In 2002.

Quiroz v. Short

85 F. Supp. 3d 1092 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 31, 2015

Accordingly, defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. Alternatively, even assuming that the law is clearly established that plaintiffs relationship with Ms. … Alternatively, defendant is entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. The law is clearly established that inmates have a right to marry. Turner, 482 U.S. at 95-96 , 107 S.Ct. 2254 .

Koller v. Harris

312 F. Supp. 3d 814 · District Court, N.D. California · Apr 20, 2018

Qualified Immunity i. … For a constitutional right to be clearly established under the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, "its contours must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates

Cordova v. Lake County

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 29, 2024

To analyze qualified immunity, a court engages in a two- 14 prong inquiry, asking whether a constitutional right has been violated and whether that right was 15 “clearly established.” Pearson v. … The Court concludes 21 that Howe and Martinez are entitled to qualified immunity.

(PC) Gould v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 3, 2020

Id. at 236. 14 With respect to the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, the Supreme Court 15 has recently held that “[a]n officer cannot be said to have violated a clearly established right unless … .; see, e.g., Pearson, 555 5 U.S. at 243-45 (concluding that officers were entitled to qualified immunity because their conduct 6 was not clearly established as unconstitutional as the “consent-once-removed” doctrine

Dougherty v. Golden Gate Bridge

31 F. Supp. 2d 724 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 7, 1998

qualifying for Eleventh Amendment immunity. … Earlier in the opinion, however, the court clearly had established that the Port Authority enjoyed Eleventh Amendment immunity, id. at 613 ; and it was not until the court held that the Port Authority' enjoyed Eleventh Amendment