Case law

Millicom International Cellular, S.A. v. Republic of Costa Rica

995 F. Supp. 14 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 23, 1998

The plaintiffs’ other allegations also fail to establish “direct effects” under this clause. Id. … Additionally, the plaintiffs cannot rely on any repercussion felt by their shareholders and creditors to establish “direct effects” under this clause because any derivative harm would be too indirect to qualify as an “immediate

Powell v. Nigro

601 F. Supp. 144 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 16, 1985

Thus, defendants are at most entitled to qualified immunity if their acts were performed in good faith. … It would be premature for the Court to rule at this time on whether the defendants are protected by qualified immunity as “the scope of that immunity will necessarily be related to facts as yet not established either by affidavits

Lyles v. Micenko

468 F. Supp. 2d 68 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 29, 2006

This “qualified immunity” acts as a defense for governmental officials, including police officers, from claims of liability under § 1983. Anderson v. … Lyles, the Court finds that the Officers would be entitled to qualified immunity because their decision to arrest and charge Ms. Lyles was reasonable. See Hunter v.

Jiggetts v. Cipullo

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 23, 2019

Thus, a defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity if (1) the defendant’s conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) the right was “clearly established at the time.” Id. at 231. … by qualified immunity.

Thorp v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 30, 2018

Qualified Immunity Thorp next sets his sights on the qualified-immunity analysis in the prior Opinion. … The case went on to hold that qualified immunity should instead rely on “the objective reasonableness of an official’s conduct, as measured by reference to clearly established law.” Id. at 818 (emphasis added).

Redmond v. United States Parole Commission

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 4, 2019

The Chair and Commissioners enjoy qualified immunity for each of Redmond’s claims. Cf. Redmond v. … right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”

Gates v. District of Columbia

66 F. Supp. 3d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 29, 2014

Qualified immunity The police defendants seek summary judgment in their favor, asserting that the doctrine of qualified immunity protects public officials from liability for civil damages for official actions taken. … However, “qualified immunity does not shield government officials who ‘violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Arrington, 473 F.3d at 338 -39 (quoting

Johnson v. Wilson

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 10, 2024

force against Plaintiff and Officer Wilson was not entitled to qualified immunity as a bystander. … immunity and qualified privilege.

Rimsat, Ltd. v. Hilliard

207 B.R. 964 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 10, 1997

The four-prong collateral estoppel test has clearly been met. This court is therefore barred from ruling upon the previously determined issue of Hil-liard’s immunity under the FSIA. … As such, he does not qualify for immunity under the FSIA, despite his status as a Nevis appointed receiver. Jugobanka d.d. New York Agency v. Unis Int’l Corp., No. 93C1865, 1995 WL 3987 , at *4 (N.D.Ill.

Barnes v. District of Columbia

238 F. Supp. 3d 106 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 3, 2017

7 clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” … immunity analysis, which requires that the constitutional violation be apparent to a reasonable officer in light of clearly established law.

Melton v. District of Columbia

85 F. Supp. 3d 183 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 27, 2015

“Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the .right was “clearly established … Because qualified immunity is “an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability, ... it is effectively lost if a case is erroneously permitted to go to trial.” Mitchell v.

Estate of Phillips v. District of Columbia

355 F. Supp. 2d 212 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 11, 2005

immunity. … In -its analysis, the Circuit Court noted that for an official to be personally liable, “that official must have violated a constitutional right, and that right must have been ‘clearly established’ — ‘the contours of the

OLANIYI v. District of Columbia

763 F. Supp. 2d 70 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 4, 2011

Accordingly, the FBI agents who conducted the inventory search are entitled to qualified immunity. … Unlike the Rule 56(f) motion directed at the District of Columbia, in the qualified immunity context the Court "must exercise its discretion in a way that protects the substance of the qualified immunity defense.

Banks v. York

515 F. Supp. 2d 89 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 17, 2007

Immunity “[G]overnment officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … established at the time Tally acted, and Tally is therefore entitled to qualified immunity.

Pimentel v. City of Methuen

323 F. Supp. 3d 255 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 26, 2018

Qualified Immunity Defendants further contend that Police Chief Solomon and the other individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects public employees "from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Jones v. Quintana

658 F. Supp. 2d 183 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2009

The Court declines to consider the merits of Defendant Quintana’s qualified immunity claim at this time. … in light of the relevant qualified immunity case law. 8 3.

Brown v. Wilhelm

923 F. Supp. 2d 314 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 15, 2013

immunity. … of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken.”)

Schultz v. Doher

335 F. Supp. 3d 177 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 27, 2018

Qualified immunity serves as a shield to 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 … Courts use a two-part test to determine whether qualified immunity applies: (1) whether the facts alleged by the plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional right; and if so (2) whether the right was clearly established

Taylor v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2019

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields police officers, including WMATA police officers, 4 “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … A defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity if the plaintiff establishes that (1) the defendant’s conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) the right was “clearly established” at the time of the defendant’s

IT & E Overseas, Inc. v. RCA Global Communications, Inc.

747 F. Supp. 6 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 12, 1990

Moreover, private parties acting in compliance with clearly articulated government policies and programs are immunized from antitrust liability to the same extent as the government entity. … to the qualified immunity afforded to state and *12 local governments.