Case law

Boothe v. Islamic Republic of Iran

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 24, 2026

Supp. 2d 136, 155 (D.D.C. 2010) (holding that “the elements of immunity and liability . . . are essentially the same,” such that if the immunity waiver applies and a cause of action exists, liability is established). … Under the first approach, the remaining Plaintiffs have clearly established Iran’s liability because liability exists whenever the terrorism exception and § 1605A(c) cause of action are satisfied. See Foley, 804 F.

McCormick v. District of Columbia

899 F. Supp. 2d 59 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 22, 2012

Qualified Immunity The foregoing analysis also suffices to show why qualified immunity protects Defendants Corrections Director Brown and Internal Affairs Investigator Patten. … Because McCormick has not shown a violation of a constitutional right, Defendants Brown and Patten are entitled to qualified immunity.

Ross v. United States

641 F. Supp. 368 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 25, 1986

Thus, to qualify for immunity, Mr. … Cf Hobson, supra, 737 F.2d at 20 (particularity in pleading required in civil rights complaints where defendant asserts qualified immunity). Plaintiffs’ theory with regard to Mr.

Martin v. United States

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 27, 2025

The FTCA also does not waive the United States’ sovereign immunity as to Count Four. To establish jurisdiction under the FTCA, a plaintiff must “demonstrate that the claim asserted is the kind permitted by statute.” … Nor does Martin identify any new statutes that clearly waive the United States’ sovereign immunity for Counts Four and Five. For example, he cites 28 U.S.C. § 612.

Lee v. Trump

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 4, 2026

Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982) (“Until this threshold [qualified] immunity question is resolved, discovery should not be allowed.”); Behrens v. … Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299, 309–11 (1996) (holding that denials of qualified immunity are immediately appealable at both the motion to dismiss and summary judgment stages); United States v. Trump, 706 F.

Pearson v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 23, 2009

Supp. 2d 198, 200 (D.D.C. 2006).12 In this case, the individual defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because their actions did not violate clearly established law. (Defs.’ … Having concluded that plaintiff’s allegations do not show a violation of any constitutional right, the Court need not determine whether the right infringed was “clearly established” such that qualified immunity applies.

Jefferies v. District of Columbia

917 F. Supp. 2d 10 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 7, 2013

Chief Lanier has Qualified Immunity from Individual Liability for Plaintiff’s Statutory and Constitutional Causes of Action Chief Lanier would also enjoy qualified immunity from individual liability … It is appropriate to raise issues of qualified immunity in a motion to dismiss.

Agudas Chasidei Chabad of United States v. Russian Federation

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 27, 2023

Under that statute, “Congress established . . . a comprehensive framework for resolving any claim of sovereign immunity.” Republic of Argentina v. … “To enforce an award against a foreign state in the United States, a party must therefore establish both that the foreign state is not immune from suit and that the property to be attached or executed against is not immune

Jangjoo v. Broadcasting Board of Governors

244 F. Supp. 3d 160 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 27, 2017

Circuit emphasized in Mpoy, “even if speech is protected by the First Amendment, a court must dismiss claims against a government official in his personal capacity if the official is entitled to qualified immunity.” … “Under [the doctrine of qualified immunity], courts may not award damages against a government official in his personal capacity unless ‘the official violated a statutory or constitutional right’ and ‘the right was clearly

Singh v. District of Columbia

55 F. Supp. 3d 55 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 8, 2014

Qualified Immunity The District also argues that Officer Dohare is entitled to qualified immunity because the trial court’s partial denial of Singh’s motion for judgment of acquittal demonstrates that probable … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from suit for civil damages unless a plaintiff shows that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and that the right was clearly established

Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Bureau of Land Management

562 F. Supp. 2d 159 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 27, 2008

There, the court stated that to qualify for the sovereign-immunity exception articulated in Thompson, a statute must evince clear congressional intent regarding retroactive application, either on its face or in its legislative … Such a finding certainly establishes a causal connection between the filing of the complaint and the release of documents.

Roth v. Trump

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 21, 2021

“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 of which a reasonable … The plaintiffs have not, however, pointed to a violation of any clearly established Fourth Amendment right that can overcome the defendants’ entitlement to qualified immunity.

Caldwell v. Hammonds

53 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 1999

Qualified immunity Qualified immunity protects an official from suits for damages in the performance of discretionary duties unless the official “ ‘knew or reasonably should have known that the action he took within his sphere … A transfer for such a reason would violate clearly established constitutional law, as the Defendants knew or should have known.

Weise v. Jenkins

796 F. Supp. 2d 188 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 13, 2011

Both motions raised, among other arguments, the defense of qualified immunity. … Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court, holding that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because Plaintiffs’ right not to be ejected from the Presidential event was not clearly established

Robertson v. Merola

895 F. Supp. 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 8, 1995

immunity. … Plaintiff fails to identify a clearly established right which the Defendants are alleged to have violated.

SACE S.p.A. v. Republic of Paraguay

243 F. Supp. 3d 21 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 21, 2017

World Wide Minerals, Ltd., 296 F.3d at 1162 (requiring that a foreign state must have “clearly and unambiguously” expressed its intent to waive its sovereign immunity). … which unquestionably qualifies as a public act.

Jerome Stevens Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Food & Drug Administration

319 F. Supp. 2d 45 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 28, 2004

First, the act of extending the deadlines clearly involves “an element of judgment or choice.” Macharía, 334 F.3d at 65 . … Moreover, the decision as to when and whether to take enforcement action against unapproved drugs qualifies as discretionary.

Powers-Bunce v. District of Columbia

479 F. Supp. 2d 146 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 28, 2007

Indeed, the assertion of a qualified immunity defense significantly changes and complicates the analysis that the Court must perform in the context of these motions to dismiss. … Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299, 306 , 116 S.Ct. 834 , 133 L.Ed.2d 773 (1996) (“Unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal

Kapar v. Islamic Replublic of Iran

105 F. Supp. 3d 99 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 22, 2015

and execution absent a waiver of foreign sovereign immunity. … Reference to Section 1605A in Section 1610(g)’s attachment provision is quite clearly a benefit provided by the law.

Kimberlin v. Quinlan

774 F. Supp. 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 6, 1991

that were clearly established at the time of the conduct in question. … right, and qualified immunity would not attach to their actions.