Case law

Swartwood v. County of San Diego

84 F. Supp. 3d 1093 · District Court, S.D. California · Sep 30, 2014

Qualified immunity. … Defendants argue that Bryson and Curiel are entitled to qualified immunity because the governing law was not clearly established when R.S. and D.S. were removed. (De/s.’ MSJ, p. 12.)

Wilson v. Poulos

697 F. Supp. 2d 1192 · District Court, S.D. California · Mar 2, 2010

Defendant Poulos’s entitlement to qualified immunity is clear under the second prong of the Katz test. 1 The “clearly established” inquiry requires the Court to look to the time of the events in question. … Since this right was not clearly established at the time of Plaintiffs incarceration, Defendant Poulos is entitled to qualified immunity.

Walter v. County of San Diego

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 30, 2020

A public official is entitled to qualified immunity “unless the official’s 12 conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. [Citation omitted.]” Id. at 232. 13 In Saucier v. … Because the law was clearly 7 established, Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. 8 9 D.

David v. Giurbino

488 F. Supp. 2d 1048 · District Court, S.D. California · Mar 16, 2007

“Clearly Established” Law The second prong of Saucier asks “whether the right was clearly established.” Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 . … Because Plaintiff has not shown the violation of a clearly established right under RLUIPA, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from Plaintiffs claims for damages.

Avratin v. Bermudez

420 F. Supp. 2d 1121 · District Court, S.D. California · Jan 5, 2006

Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Clearly Established Right Having satisfied the first prong of the qualified immunity analysis, the Court must consider whether “it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation he confronted

Luna v. Ridge

436 F. Supp. 2d 1163 · District Court, S.D. California · Jun 9, 2006

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields public officials from liability for civil damages as long as their conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … “Thus, a two-part test controls our qualified immunity analysis. First, we must determine whether the law that governs the official’s conduct was clearly established.

Cordell v. Tilton

515 F. Supp. 2d 1114 · District Court, S.D. California · Sep 17, 2007

In ruling on qualified immunity, the court must decide the “ ‘purely legal’ issue of ‘whether facts alleged by the plaintiff support a claim of violation of clearly established law.’ ” Lytle v. … “Whether the right at issue in a claim of qualified immunity is clearly established is judged as of the date of the incident alleged and is a pure question of law....” Phillips v.

Carter v. City of Carlsbad

799 F. Supp. 2d 1147 · District Court, S.D. California · Jun 30, 2011

Whether Officer Meritt Is Entitled to Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … The decisions go back and forth, however, on the second prong of the qualified immunity inquiry — whether the law was clearly established at the time of the incident.

Sterner v. United States Drug Enforcement Agency ("Dea")

467 F. Supp. 2d 1017 · District Court, S.D. California · Oct 11, 2006

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … Finally, “a plaintiff can only survive summary judgment on a defense claim of qualified immunity if the plaintiff can both establish a substantial showing of a deliberate falsehood or reckless disregard and establish that

Mann v. County of San Diego

147 F. Supp. 3d 1066 · District Court, S.D. California · Nov 23, 2015

established right, Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity to the extent that Plaintiffs’ § 1983 claims rested on the Po-linsky examinations. … of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time the action was taken.”

Martin v. County of San Diego

650 F. Supp. 2d 1094 · District Court, S.D. California · Oct 23, 2009

at issue was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged misconduct. … Maus’ qualified immunity argument.

Doe v. City of San Diego

35 F. Supp. 3d 1214 · District Court, S.D. California · Mar 27, 2014

The doctrine of qualified immunity provides a public official performing a discretionary function immunity in a civil action for damages, provided his or her conduct does not violate clearly established federal statutory … “In order to be entitled to qualified immunity, the officers must show that their discretionary conduct did not violate any clearly established rights of which a reasonable person should have known.” Penilla v.

Abney v. Alameida

334 F. Supp. 2d 1221 · District Court, S.D. California · Aug 20, 2004

Qualified Immunity. Defendant claims he is entitled to dismissal based on qualified immunity. … Specifically, Defendant contends that Plaintiff has not established a constitutional violation, but that, even assuming one is now recognized, qualified immunity is appropriate because it . has never been clearly es *1234

Hendon v. Ramsey

528 F. Supp. 2d 1058 · District Court, S.D. California · Dec 28, 2007

Qualified immunity shields government officials "from liability insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v. … Qualified immunity shields government officials "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

Robinson v. Catlett

725 F. Supp. 2d 1203 · District Court, S.D. California · Jul 19, 2010

Qualified Immunity Alternatively, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on these claims. … State officials are entitled to qualified immunity if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.

Crowe v. County of San Diego

359 F. Supp. 2d 994 · District Court, S.D. California · Feb 28, 2005

, pursuant to which the officer is entitled to qualified immunity if the law was not “clearly established,” i.e., if it would not have been clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful under the circumstances … Again, as explained by the Supreme Court most recently in Brosseau , in a case such as this, a plaintiff cannot defeat a summary judgment motion on qualified immunity grounds simply by pointing to case law clearly establishing

Gray v. Hernandez

651 F. Supp. 2d 1167 · District Court, S.D. California · Aug 27, 2009

Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity because their conduct did not violate any clearly-established right under the circumstances in which they acted. (Mot. at 14.) … See Pratt, 65 F.3d at 806 (“the prohibition against retaliatory punishment is ‘clearly established law’ in the Ninth Circuit, for qualified immunity purposes.”) (citing Schroeder v.

Rosado v. Alameida

497 F. Supp. 2d 1179 · District Court, S.D. California · Jun 14, 2007

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 … Pickett’s decision is not protected by qualified immunity.

Roe v. City of San Diego

289 F.R.D. 604 · District Court, S.D. California · Mar 5, 2013

Second, Sixth, and Twenty-Second Affirmative Defenses — Good Faith, Exercise of Discretion, & Qualified Immunity Defendants’ second, sixth, and twenty-second affirmative defenses all relate to qualified immunity and the relationship … Sept. 14, 2011) (“[G]iven the case law that municipal entities qualify for neither absolute or qualified immunity, plaintiff is free to pursue the entity despite a finding of immunity for individuals, if she has otherwise

Johnson v. Hornung

358 F. Supp. 2d 910 · District Court, S.D. California · Feb 17, 2005

Saucier qualified immunity inquiry, whether the constitutional right was clearly established in the factual context presented by this case. … Qualified Immunity Under the qualified immunity doctrine, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly